Compară metode

	Historical Hermeneutics	Witness Reliability Triangulation
Domeniu	Historiography	Historiography
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Anul apariției	1819	1970
Autorul original	Friedrich Schleiermacher; Wilhelm Dilthey; Hans-Georg Gadamer	Classical source-critical tradition; formalized via triangulation in social science
Tip	qualitative interpretive method	qualitative evidential method
Sursa seminală	Howell, M., & Prevenier, W. (2001). From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods. Cornell University Press. ISBN: 9780801485602	Howell, M., & Prevenier, W. (2001). From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods. Cornell University Press. ISBN: 9780801485602
Denumiri alternative	Hermeneutics, Textual Interpretation, Hermeneutic Method, Verstehen	Source Triangulation, Corroboration Analysis, Testimony Cross-Checking, Convergence of Evidence
Înrudite	4	4
Rezumat	Historical hermeneutics is the theory and practice of interpreting historical texts in order to recover their meaning. Growing from the older art of scriptural and legal exegesis, it was generalized by Friedrich Schleiermacher into a universal method of understanding, deepened by Wilhelm Dilthey into the foundation of the human sciences, and given its modern philosophical form by Hans-Georg Gadamer. The method confronts a basic problem: a text from the past was written in a language, genre, and worldview not our own, for an audience whose assumptions we do not share. To understand it, the interpreter must reconstruct what its words meant to its author and first readers, moving in a circle between the meaning of the parts and the sense of the whole. Gadamer added a reflexive turn, insisting that interpreters cannot escape their own historical position but must bring it into a fusion of horizons with the text. Hermeneutics thus supplies the interpretive depth that source criticism, concerned with authenticity and reliability, leaves open.	Witness reliability triangulation is the procedure by which a historian combines several testimonies about the same event to reach a justified conclusion about what happened. It rests on a simple but powerful logic: a single account, however vivid, may be mistaken or self-serving, but when independent sources that could not have colluded converge on the same point, the probability that they are all wrong in the same way becomes small. The method, descended from the classical source-critical tradition and sharpened by the social-scientific concept of triangulation associated with Donald Campbell and Norman Denzin, requires the historian to inventory the available testimonies, assess each one's reliability and bias through internal criticism, establish whether the sources are genuinely independent, and then treat their agreement as corroboration while explaining their disagreements. The same Bayesian intuition underlies the use of multiple, independent evidentiary streams in process-tracing case analysis. Triangulation is how disparate, fallible sources are turned into defensible historical knowledge.