If history is written with agenda or is heavily influenced by the historian, is it possible to

come up with an absolute historical truth?

Is history an objective discipline? Explain your answer.

If it is not, is it still worthwhile to study history?

Yes,

2. Presentation Phase:

The 3-A Approach

2.1. ANALYSIS (Communication)

The questions above have haunted historians for many generations. Indeed, an exact and accurate
account of the past is impossible for the very simple reason that we cannot go back to the past. We
cannot access the past directly as our subject matter. Historians only get to access representation of
the past through historical sources and evidence.

Therefore, it is the historian’s job not just to seek historical evidences and facts but also to interpret
these facts. ”Facts cannot speak for themselves”. It is the job of the historian to give meaning to
these facts and organize them into a timeline, establish causes, and write history. Historians only get
to access representation of the past through historical sources and evidences. He is a person of his
own who is influenced by his own context, environment, ideology, education, and influences, among
others. His subjectivity will inevitably influence the process of his historical research. Thus, in one
way or another, history is always subjective. If that is so, can history be considered as an academic
and scientific inquiry?

2.2 ABSTRACTION (Critical Thinking):

HISTORY and ITS HISTORICAL SOURCES

Historical research requires rigor. Despite the fact that historians cannot ascertain absolute
objectivity, the study of history remains scientific because of the rigor of research and methodology
that historians employ.

Historical Methodology comprises certain techniques and rules that historians follow in order to
properly utilize sources and historical evidences in writing history. Certain rules apply in cases of
conflicting accounts in different sources, and on how to properly treat eyewitness accounts and oral
sources as valid historical evidence. In doing so, historical claims done by historians and the
arguments that they forward in their historical writings, while may be influenced by the historian’s
inclinations, can still be validated by using reliable evidences and employing correct and meticulous
historical methodology.

Some School of Thoughts in History

POSITIVISM

-is the school of thought that emerged between the 18th and 19th century.

-it requires empirical and observable evidence before one can claim that a particular knowledge is
true.

-the mantra, “no document, no history” stems from this very same truth, where historians were
required to show written primary documents in order to write a particular historical narrative.

- it entails an objective means at arriving at a conclusion.

- Positive historians are expected to be objective and impartial not just in their arguments but also in
their conduct of historical research.

As a narrative, any history that has been taught and written is always intended for a certain group of
audience. When the ilustrados, like Jose Rizal, Isabelo de los Reyes and Pedro Paterno wrote
history, they intended it for the Spaniards so that they would realize that Filipinos are people of their
own intellect and culture. When American historians depicted the Filipino people as uncivilized in
their publications, they intended that narrative for their fellow Americans to justify their colonization of
the islands. They wanted the colonization to appear not as a means of undermining the Philippines’
sovereignty, but as a civilizing mission to fulfill what they called as the “white man’s burden”. The
same is true for nations which prescribes official versions of their history like North Korea, the Nazi
Germany during the war period, and Thailand. The same was attempted by Marcos in the
Philippines during the 1970s.

POSTCOLONIALISM

-it emerged in the early 20th century when formerly colonized nations grappled with the idea of
creating their identities and understanding their societies against the shadows of their colonial past.

-it looks at two things in writing history:

1. To tell the history of their nation that will highlight their identity free from that of colonial
discourse and knowledge.

2. To criticize the methods, effects, and idea of colonialism.

One of the problems confronted by history is the accusation that the history is always written by
victors. This connotes that the narrative of the past is always written from the bias of the powerful
and the more dominant player. For instance, the history of the Second world war in the Philippines
always depicts the United States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army as the oppressors.
Filipinos who collaborated with the Japanese were lumped in the category of traitors or
collaborators. However, a more thorough historical investigation will reveal a more nuanced account
of the history of that period instead of a simplified narrative as a story of hero versus villain.

THE ANNALES SCHOOL of HISTORY

-is a school of history born in France that challenged the canons of history

-it did away with the common historical subjects that were almost always related to the conduct of
states and monarchs

-scholars were concerned with social history and studied longer historical periods

For example, if a historian chooses to use an oral account as his data in studying the ethnic history
of Ifugaos in the Cordilleras during the American Occupation, he needs to validate the claims of his
informant through comparing and corroborating it with written sources. Therefore, while bias is
inevitable, the historian can balance this out by relying to evidences that back up his claim. In this
sense, the historian need not let his bias blind his judgment and such bias is only acceptable if he
maintains his rigor as a researcher.

HISTORICAL SOURCES

With the past as history’s subject matter, the historian’s most important research tools are historical
sources. In general, historical sources can be classified between primary and secondary sources.
The classification of sources between these two categories depends on the historical subject being
studied. These are the following:

1. PRIMARY SOURCES

2. SECONDARY SOURCES

3. TERTIARY SOURCES
Primary sources are those sources produced at the same time as the event, period, or subject
being studied. Primary sources are most often produced around the time of the events you are studying.
They reflect what their creator observed or believed about the event. These sources serve as the raw
material that you’ll analyze and synthesize in order to answer your research question, and they will form
key pieces of evidence in your paper’s argument.

-are the original sources of information recorded at the time an event occurred.

–are original materials that have not been altered or distorted in any way.

–is something that originates from the past.

For example, if a historian wishes to study the Commonwealth Constitution Convention of 1935, his
primary sources can include the minutes of the convention, newspaper clippings, Philippine
Commission reports of the US Commissioners, records of the convention, the draft of the
Constitution, and even photographs of the event. Eyewitness accounts of convention delegates and
their memoir can also be used as primary sources. The same goes with the other subjects of
historical study. Archival documents, artifacts, memorabilia, letters, census, and government
records, among others are the most common examples of primary sources.

Examples of Primary Sources

– government publications
– oral histories
– records of organizations
– autobiographies and memoirs
– printed ephemera
– artifacts, e.g. clothing, costumes, furniture
– research data, e.g. public opinion polls
– archives and manuscript material
– photographs, audio recordings, video recordings, films
– journals, letters and diaries
– speeches
– scrapbooks
– published books, newspapers and magazine clippings published at the time

Why use primary sources?

– To explain how major events are related to each other in time.

– To think critically and distinguish between fact and opinion.
– To recognize point of view in print and visual materials.
– To develop your own conclusions and analyze how historical events affect your life.
– To recognize failures and successes in the past in order to make better decisions as a
citizen.
– To understand who you are by examining your roots or placing yourself in that time period or
situation.

Finding Primary Sources

– Use the library catalog
– Ask your librarian
– Search article databases and limit to primary sources or peer-reviewed
– Search Google Books
Some databases will let you limit to Primary Sources.
To find primary documents on the web, try the following internet search topic + “primary source”.

Secondary Sources, are those sources which were produced by an author who used primary
sources to produce the material. In other words, secondary sources are historical sources, which
studied a certain historical subject. For example, on the subject of the Philippine Revolution of
1896, students can read Teodoro Agoncillo’s Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and
the Katipunan published originally in 1956. The Philippine Revolution happened in the last years
of the nineteenth century while Agoncillo published hi work in 1956, which makes the Revolt of
the Masses a secondary source. More than this, in writing the book, Agoncillo used primary
sources with his research like documents of the Katipunan, interview with the veterans of the
Revolution, and correspondence between and among Katipuneros.

–is made up of information collected from numerous primary sources that is interpreted by the
collector.
–A secondary source may offer information that is more analytical and comprehensive than that
found in a primary source.
-Secondary sources of information are derived from primary sources
–Summaries of primary sources
–Analyses or interpretations of primary sources

When using secondary sources, it thus helps to ask these questions:

– Has the author been trained in the right field, and does he or she have decent credit in the
academic world?
– Where was the source published and could that impact the contents at all?
– When was the source published?
– What is the scope of the source?
– Which sources has the author used and how critical has he or she been?
 Why use secondary sources?
– To get expert opinions in order to evaluate what really happened.
– To gain insight by examining the same event from different perspectives.
– To form your own opinion.
– To save time by reading information collected from a number of different sources.

Secondary Source Examples

Some types of secondary sources include:
-magazine articles
-histories
-criticisms
-Commentaries
-Book reviews are secondary sources
-Bibliographies (also considered tertiary);
-Biographical works;
-Commentaries, criticisms;
-Dictionaries, Encyclopedias (also considered tertiary);
-Histories;
-Literary criticism such as Journal articles;
-Magazine and newspaper articles;
-Monographs, other than fiction and autobiography;
-Textbooks (also considered tertiary);
-Web site (also considered primary).

However, a student should not be confused about what counts as a primary or a secondary source.
As mentioned above, the classification of sources between primary and secondary depends not on
the period when the source was produced or the type of the source but on the subject of the
historical research. For example, a textbook is usually classified as a secondary source, a tertiary
source even. However, this classification is usual but not automatic. If a historian chooses to write
the history of education in the 1980s, he can utilize textbooks used in that period as a primary
source. If a historian wishes to study the historiography of the Filipino-American War for example, he
can use works of different authors on the topic as his primary source as well.

TERTIARY SOURCES
– Tertiary sources consist of information which is a distillation and collection of primary and
secondary sources.
– These are sources that index, abstract, organize, compile, or digest other sources.
– Some reference materials and textbooks are considered tertiary sources when their chief
purpose is to list, summarize or simply repackage ideas or other information.
– Tertiary sources are usually not credited to a particular author.

Examples of Tertiary Sources

– Almanacs;
– Bibliographies (also considered secondary);
– Chronologies;
– Dictionaries and Encyclopedias (also considered secondary);
– Directories;
– Fact books;
– Guidebooks;
– Indexes, abstracts, bibliographies used to locate primary and secondary sources;
– Manuals;
– Textbooks (also be secondary).

Some general questions you should ask of any type of source are:
– What type of source is it?
 – What does its form tell us? Is it a neatly engraved inscription, an undecorated, heavily used
bit of earthenware, or a roughly scribbled letter on cheap paper? 
– Who created the source? How did they gather the necessary information? Were they an
eyewitness, or did they rely on researching other sources or on the stories of people who had
witnessed the event? Could they be biased?
– With which goal was the source created? Did the creator want to tell a truthful story or, for
instance, influence others through propaganda? How reliable does that make it? 
– What is the context in which the source was created? To understand a source it helps to
know something about the society and immediate context in which it was made.
– What is the content of the source and how do we interpret it? What does it tell us and what
does it not tell us? What are its limitations? What sorts of questions could this source
answer? 

In practice the difference between primary and secondary sources depends upon:
– How close the writer was to the events described, whether or not the account was produced
at the time or later and the motives of the writer.
– On the subject of the historical research.

Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and learning history. However,
historians and students of history need to thoroughly scrutinize these historical sources to avoid
deception and to come up with the historical truth. The historian should be able to conduct an
external and internal criticism of the source, especially primary sources which can age in
centuries.

VALIDATION of HISTORICAL SOURCES:

EXTERNAL CRITICISM
– Is the practice of verifying the authenticity of evidence by examining its physical
characteristics;
– Its consistency with the historical characteristic of the time when it was produced;
– The materials used for the evidence
Examples:
– Quality of the paper
– Type of the ink
– Language and words used in the material

INTERNAL CRITICISM
– Is the examination of the truthfulness of the evidence
– Looks at the content of the source
– Examines the circumstances of its production
– Looks at the truthfulness and factuality of the evidence by looking at the author of the source,
its context, the agenda behind its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended
purpose.
- For example, Japanese reports and declarations during the period of the war should not be
taken as a historical fact hastily. Internal criticism entails that the historian acknowledge and
analyze how such reports can be manipulated to be used as war propaganda.

Validating historical sources is important because the use of unverified, falsified, and untruthful
historical sources can lead to equally false conclusions. Without thorough criticisms of historical
evidences, historical deceptions and lies will be probable.

One of the most scandalous cases of deception in Philippine history is the hoax Code of Kalantiaw.
The code was a set of rules contained in an epic, Maragtas, which was allegedly written by a certain
Datu Kalantiaw. The document was sold to the National Library and was regarded as an important
precolonial document until 1968, when American historian William Henry Scott debunked the
authenticity of the code due to anachronism and lack of evidence to prove that the code exited in the
precolonial Philippine society. Ferdinand Marcos also claimed that he was a decorated World War II
soldier who led a guerilla unit called Ang Maharlika. This was widely believed by students of history
and Marcos had war medals to show. This claim, however, was disproven when historians
counterchecked Marcos’s claims with the war records of the United States. These cases prove how
deceptions can propagate without rigorous historical research.

The task of the historian is to look at the available historical sources and select the most relevant
and meaningful for history and for the subject matter that he is studying. History, like other
academic discipline, has come a long way but still has a lot of remaining tasks to do. It does not
claim to render absolute and exact judgment because as long as questions are continuously asked,
and as long as time unfolds, the study of history can never be complete. The task of the historian is
to organize the past that is being created so that it can offer lessons for nations, societies, and
civilization. It is the historian’s job to seek for the meaning of recovering the past to let the people
see the continuing relevance of provenance, memory, remembering, and historical understanding for
both the present and the future.

Changes in Philippine Historiography

– Ancient Filipinos narrated their history through communal songs and epics
– Spanish colonizers narrated the history of their colony in bipartite view
– Early nationalists refuted the view of the Spaniards and argued the tripartite view
– Filipino historian Zeus Salazar introduced the new and guiding philosophy for writing and
teaching history: pantayong pananaw (for us-from us perspective):
This perspective highlights the importance of facilitating an internal conversation and
discourse among Filipinos about our own history, using the language that is understood by
everyone.

2.3. APPLICATION (Creativity)

Read the following scenarios and classify the sources discovered as primary, secondary, or tertiary
sources. Write your answer on the space provided.

1. Maribeth was a new teacher of Araling Panlipunan in a small elementary school in Capas, Tarlac.
Her colleagues gave her the new textbook that she ought to use in class. Before the class started,
Maribeth studied the textbook carefully. She noted that the authors used works by other known
historians in writing the textbook. She saw that the bibliography included Teodoro Agoncillo’s The
Revolt of the Masses and the Fateful Years: Japan’s Adventure in the Philippines, 1941-45. She
also saw that the authors used Ma. Luisa Camagay’s Working Women of Manila During the 19 th
Century and many others. Is the textbook a primary, secondary or tertiary source?
_____________________________________________

2. Martha loved to travel around the country. She liked bringing with her a travel brochure that
informs her of the different sites worth visiting in the area. Her travel brochure was usually
produced by the tourism department of the province. It shoes pictures of destinations visited by
tourists and a few basic information about the place like the origin of the name, the historical
significance of the place, and some other information acquired by the office’s researchers and
writers. Is the travel brochure a primary, secondary or tertiary source?
_________________________________________________

3. Roberto visited the United States for a few months to see his relatives who have lived there for
decades. His uncle brought him on tours around Illinois. Roberto visited the Field Museum of
Natural History where a golden image of a woman caught his eye. Roberto looked closer and
read that the image was called “The Golden Tara”. It originated from Agusan del Sur and was
bought by the museum in 1922. It was believed to be made prior to the arrival of the Spaniards in
the Philippines. Is the sculpture a primary, secondary or tertiary source?
_________________________________________________

3. Assessment Phase:
3.1. Work Activities
Sharp Up Your Mind
True or False. Write true if the statement is true. Otherwise, write false in the space provided.

_______1. Historical sources that were not written should not be used in writing history.
_______2. Only primary sources may be used in writing history.
_______3. The historians are the only source of history.
_______4. There are two types of historical sources: Primary and secondary sources.
_______5. External criticism is done by examining the physical characteristics of a source.
_______6. The subject of historiography is the history itself.
_______7. Diary is an example of primary source.
_______8. Without thorough criticisms of historical evidences, historical deceptions and lies will be
highly probable.
_______9. Internal criticism is done by looking at a source’s quality of paper and type of ink, among
others.
_______10. The classification of sources between primary and secondary depends on the period
when the source was produced.

3.2. Take Home Tasks

Using the examples of primary source in this module, show a primary source/s that can be
used in the writing of your life history. Present this in class during our online class and
discuss how it qualifies as a primary source.

Read the excerpts below then do a comparative analysis.

The following readings discuss the findings on the remains of what was then considered the
earliest known human remains in the Philippines- TABON MAN.

Robert B. Fox. The Tabon Caves: Archaeological Explorations and Excavations on Palawan
Island, Philippine (Manila, 1970) p. 40.

TABON MAN- During the initial excavations of Tabon Cave, June and July, 1962 the scattered fossil bones
of at least three individuals were excavated, including a large fragment of a frontal bone with the brows and
portions of the nasal bones. These fossil bones were recovered towards the rear of the cave along the left
wall. Unfortunately, the area in which the human fossil bones were discovered had been disturbed by
Magapode birds. It was not possible in 1962 to establish the association of these bones with a specific flake
assemblage. Although they were provisionally related to either Flake Assemblage II or III, subsequent
excavations in the same area now strongly suggest that the fossil human bones were associated with Flake
Assemblage III for only the flakes of this area of the cave. The available data would suggest that Tabon Man
may be dated from 22, 000 to 24, 000 years ago. But only further excavations in the cave and chemical
analysis of human and animal bones from disturbed and undisturbed levels in the cave will define the exact
age of the human fossils.The fossil bones are those of Homo sapiens. These will form a separate study by a
specialist which will be included in the final site report for Tabon Cave. It is important, however, because of
a recent publication (Scott, 1969), that a preliminary study of the fossil bones of Tabon Man shows that it is
above average in skull dimensions when compared to the modern Filipino. There is no evidence that Tabon
was”. a less brainy individual…” (Scott (1969) 36). Moreover, Scott’s study includes many misstatements
about the Tabon Caves, always the problem when writers work from “conversation”

William Henry Scott- Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History
(Revised Edition) (Quezon City, 1984), pp. 14-15.

Tabon Man- The earliest human skull remains known in the Philippines are the fossilized fragments
of a skull and jawbone of three individuals who are collectively called “Tabon Man” after the place
where they were found on the west coast of Palawan. Tabon Cave appears to be a kind of little
Stone Age Factory: both finished tools and waste cores and flakes have been found at four different
levels in the main chamber. Charcoal left from cooking fires has been recovered from three of these
assemblages and dated by C-14 to roughly 7,000 B.C.- 20, 000 B.C. and 28,000 B.C. with an earlier
level lying so far below these that it must represent Upper Pleistocene dates like 45 or 50 thousand
years ago…. Physical anthropologists who have examined the Tabon skullcap are agreed that it
belonged to modern man- that is. Homo Sapiens as distinguished form those mid- Pleistocene
species nowadays called Homo Erectus. Two experts have given the further opinion that the
mandible is “Australian” in physical type, and that the skullcap measurements are mostly nearly like
those of Ainus and Tasmanians. What this basically means is that Tabon Man wa “pre-Mongiloid”,
Mongoloid being the term anthropologists apply to the racial stock which entered Southeasth Asia
during the Holocene and absorbed earlier peoples to produce the modern Malay, Indonesian,
Filipino, and Pacific peoples popularly- and unscientifically- called, “the brown race”. Tabon Man
presumably belonged to one of those earlier peoples, but if decently clothed in flesh, T-shirt, and
blue jeans, might pass unnoticed in Quiapo today, whatever his facial features are concerned,
nothing can be said about the color of his skin or hair, or the shape of his nose or eyes- except one
thing: Tabon Man was not a Negrito.

a. Which is the primary source and the secondary source between the two readings?

________________________________________________________________________

b. Do a credibility analysis of the sources. Who between the two authors is more credible about the
topic?

________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

2. Presentation Phase:

The 3-A Approach

2.1. ANALYSIS (Communication)

Primary Source can be analyzed and evaluated by different criteria. These criteria are the content
analysis, contextual analysis, and the author’s main argument or point of view. Context analysis-
considers the time and place the historical document was written as well as the situation or the
circumstances during the time. It is a researched method for studying primary sources such as
documents and communication artifacts, which can be texts of various formats, pictures, audio, or
video. Works pertaining to events in the past are analyzed by also taking into account the author of
the document, his/her biographical background, role in the event, and the intent for writing the
document. One of the key advantages of using content analysis to analyze social phenomena is its
non- invasive nature, in contrast to stimulating social experiences or collecting survey answers.
Practices and philosophies of content analysis vary according to the location of the source
communities. They all involve systematic reading or observation of texts or artifacts which are
assigned labels (Sometime called codes) to indicate the presence of interesting, meaningful
patterns. After labelling a large set of media, a social researcher is able to statistically estimate the
proportions of patterns in the text, as well as correlations between patterns. Nowadays, computers
are increasingly used in content analysis to automate the labeling (or coding) of documents. Simple
computational techniques can provide descriptive data such as word frequencies and document
lengths. According to Klaus Krippendorf, six questions must be addressed in every content analysis:

1. Which data are analyzed?

2. How are the data defined?
3.From what population are the data drawn?
4. What is the most relevant context?
5. What are the boundaries of the analysis?
6. What is to be measured?

The simplest and most objective forms of doing content analysis are the unambiguous
characteristics of the text like word frequencies, the page area taken by a newspaper column, or the
duration of a radio or television program. Analysis of a simple word frequencies is limited because
the meaning of a word depends on the surrounding text. The keyword in context routines address
this by placing words in their textual context. This helps resolve ambiguities such as those
introduces by synonyms and homonyms.
The second way to analyzing primary sources is the contextual analysis or simply called textual
analysis. Understanding the historical context of a primary source is called for understanding the
attitudes and influences that shaped the creations of the primary source. If not placed into historical
context, a primary source’s true meaning might be misinterpreted.

HERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO ASK IN ANALYZING PRIMARY SOURCES

1.What kind of document do you have? Is it a treatise letter? A manuscript, or a printed document?
2. Was it published? If yes, when and where?
3. Who is the author? What positions, role, reputations, status, did the author have at the time of
writing?
4. Is the author well- known today or at the time of writing?
5. Who is the intended audience?
6. Who read this text at that time? What are the responses of those who read it?
7. What was to be gained and what were the risks in writing this text?
8. How is this document related to other primary documents known to you, particularly from the
same time period?
9. Does this document square with what you know from secondary sources?
10. What evidence do you have for your claim about the text?

A further step in the analysis of primary sources is to examine the author’s main argument or main
point of view.

Here are some guide questions in critically analyzing or examining the author’s main argument and
point of view.
1. What is the author’s main objective in writing the article, book , etc?
2. Does the author seek to persuade, convince, to identify problem, or to provide a solution?
3. What are the forms of evidence used by the author? Are they effective and for whom?

A further step in the analysis of primary sources is to examine the author’s main argument or main
point of view.

In the process of analyzing a primary source, a history student must closely examine a single text
written by a single author in an attempt to understand why the writer/ author wrote the particular text
in a particular way, to a particular audience and for what purpose?

So, the history student must critically analyze/ examine the text (article, book etc.) based on these
guidelines:

1. What was argued or described by the writer?

2. How did the writer present his argument or point of view?
3. Why did the writer choose (for example, persuasion) as the method of presentation?
4. What evidences or arguments that the writer used in persuading his audience?

REMEMBER: the audience are not the history students in this subject but those people being
persuaded.

5. What does the writer ultimately hope to achieve by writing this particular text?

Significant historical text document can be deeds, laws, accounts of battles, etc. given by a person
or groups sharing their viewpoints. These documents or text have historical importance and of
historical interest.

Many of historical importance produced today, such as personal letters, pictures, contracts,
newspapers, and medical records would be considered valuable historical documents that will
survive the passage of time, by taking into account the preservation issues and either printing
documents in a manner that documents in time capsules that the degree of significance is a matter
of interpretation, often related to the value systems of the period in which the interpretations was
produced.

Hence, the main goal of carefully examining the primary source is to construct new knowledge or to
use the information that the primary source (document sample) is to explore broader historical
issues or context.

Answer the following questions:

1. Differentiate contextual analysis from content analysis?
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

2. In analyzing a single text, why is it easier to analyze the text written by a single author than by a
multiple author?
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

3. One of “don’ts” in analyzing or evaluating a primary source is to avoid recreating the author’s
experience of his society. Do you agree to this statement? If yes, why? If no, why not?
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

4. What is the main purpose of examining or evaluating primary sources?

_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

5. Why are some texts (like primary documents) difficult to analyze?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

6. As a history student, why is it more important to read primary sources than secondary sources.
Support your answer.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

7. How can you think and act like historians?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

2.2. ABSTRACTION (Critical Thinking)

Read the following elaborations to further aid your understanding.
Refer to the PowerPoint presentation SCHOOLOGY- Analysis of selected Primary Sources for
more information.

Each historian, including you, will approach a source with a different set of experiences and skills,
and will therefore interpret the document differently. Remember that there is no one right
interpretation. However, if you do not do a careful and thorough job, you might arrive at a wrong
interpretation. In order to analyze a primary source you need information about two things: the
document itself, and the era from which it comes. You can base your information about the time
period on the readings you do in class and on lectures. On your own you need to think about the
document itself. The following questions may be helpful to you as you begin to analyze the sources:

1. Look at the physical nature of your source. This is particularly important and powerful if you are
dealing with an original source (i.e., an actual old letter, rather than a transcribed and published
version of the same letter). What can you learn from the form of the source? (Was it written on fancy
paper in elegant handwriting, or on scrap-paper, scribbled in pencil?) What does this tell you?
2. Think about the purpose of the source. What was the author's message or argument? What was
he/she trying to get across? Is the message explicit, or are there implicit messages as well?
3. How does the author try to get the message across? What methods does he/she use?
4. What do you know about the author? Race, sex, class, occupation, religion, age, region, political
beliefs? Does any of this matter? How?
5. Who constituted the intended audience? Was this source meant for one person's eyes, or for the
public? How does that affect the source?
6. What can a careful reading of the text (even if it is an object) tell you? How does the language
work? What are the important metaphors or symbols? What can the author's choice of words tell
you? What about the silences--what does the author choose NOT to talk about?

Now you can evaluate the source as historical evidence.

1. Is it prescriptive--telling you what people thought should happen--or descriptive--telling you what
people thought did happen?
2. Does it describe ideology and/or behavior?
3. Does it tell you about the beliefs/actions of the elite, or of "ordinary" people? From whose
perspective?
4. What historical questions can you answer using this source? What are the benefits of using this
kind of source?
5. What questions can this source NOT help you answer? What are the limitations of this type of
source?
6. If we have read other historians' interpretations of this source or sources like this one, how does
your analysis fit with theirs? In your opinion, does this source support or challenge their argument?

How to Read a Primary Source

Good reading is about asking questions of your sources. Keep the following in mind when reading
primary sources. Even if you believe you can't arrive at the answers, imagining possible answers will
aid your comprehension. Reading primary sources requires that you use your historical imagination.
This process is all about your willingness and ability to ask questions of the material, imagine
possible answers, and explain your reasoning. As a historian, you will want to ask:

What can I know of the past based on this material?

How can I be sure about it?

How do I know these things?

Evaluating primary source texts: I've developed an acronym that may help guide your evaluation of
primary source texts: PAPER.

Purpose and motives of the author

Argument and strategy she or he uses to achieve those goals
Presuppositions and values (in the text, and our own)
Epistemology (evaluating truth content)
Relate to other texts (compare and contrast)

Ask the questions that come under each of these headings.

Purpose
Who is the author and what is her or his place in society (explain why you are justified in thinking
so)? What could or might it be, based on the text, and why? What is at stake for the author in this
text? Why do you think she or he wrote it? What evidence in the text tells you this? Does the author
have a thesis? What is that thesis?

Argument
How does the text make its case? What is its strategy for accomplishing its goal? How does it carry
out this strategy? What is the intended audience of the text? How might this influence its rhetorical
strategy? What arguments or concerns does the author respond to that are not clearly stated? Do
you think the author is credible and reliable?

Presuppositions
How do the ideas and values in the source differ from the ideas and values of our age?
What presumptions and preconceptions do you as a reader bring to bear on this text? For instance,
what portions of the text might you find objectionable, but which contemporaries might have found
acceptable?

Epistemology
How might the difference between our values and the values of the author influence the way you
understand the text. How might this text support one of the arguments found in secondary sources
you've read? What kinds of information does this text tell you without knowing it's telling you?

Relate
Now choose another of the readings, and compare the two, answering these questions:
What patterns or ideas are repeated throughout the readings? What major differences appear in
them. Which do you find more reliable and credible?

Here are some additional concepts that will help you evaluate primary source texts:

Texts and documents, authors and creators: You'll see these phrases a lot. I use the first two and
the last two as synonyms. Texts are historical documents, authors their creators, and vice versa.
"Texts" and "authors" are often used when discussing literature, while "documents" and "creators"
are more familiar to historians. Evaluating the veracity (truthfulness) of texts: For the rest of this
discussion, consider the example of a soldier who committed atrocities against non-combatants
during wartime. Later in his life, he writes a memoir that neglects to mention his role in these
atrocities, and may in fact blame them on someone else. Knowing the soldier's possible motive, we
would be right to question the veracity of his account. The credible vs. the reliable text:
Reliability refers to our ability to trust the consistency of the author's account of the truth. A reliable
text displays a pattern of verifiable truth-telling that tends to render the unverifiable parts of the text
true. For instance, the soldier above may prove to be utterly reliable in detailing the campaigns he
participated in during the war, as evidenced by corroborating records. The only gap in his reliability
may be the omission of details about the atrocities he committed. Credibility refers to our ability to
trust the author's account of the truth on the basis of her or his tone and reliability. An author who is
inconsistently truthful -- such as the soldier in the example above -- loses credibility. There are many
other ways authors undermine their credibility.

Most frequently, they convey in their tone that they are not neutral (see below). For example, the
soldier above may intersperse throughout his reliable account of campaign details vehement and
racist attacks against his old enemy. Such attacks signal readers that he may have an interest in not
portraying the past accurately, and hence may undermine his credibility, regardless of his reliability.
An author who seems quite credible may be utterly unreliable. The author who takes a measured,
reasoned tone and anticipates counter-arguments may seem to be very credible, when in fact he
presents us with complete fiction. Similarly, a reliable author may not always seem credible. It should
also be clear that individual texts themselves may have portions that are more reliable and credible
than others. The neutral text:

We often wonder if the author of a text has an "ax to grind" which might render her or his words
unreliable. Neutrality refers to the stake an author has in a text. In the example of the soldier who
committed wartime atrocities, the author seems to have had a considerable stake in his memoir,
which was to expunge his own guilt. In an utterly neutral document, the creator is not aware that she
or he has any special stake in the construction and content of the document. No texts are ever
completely neutral. People generally do not go to the trouble to record their thoughts unless they
have a purpose or design which renders them invested in the process of creating the text. Some
historical texts, such as birth records, may appear to be more neutral than others, because their
creators seem to have had less of a stake in creating them. (For instance, the county clerk who
 signed several thousand birth certificates likely had less of a stake in creating an individual birth
certificate than did a celebrity recording her life in a diary for future publication as a memoir.)
Sometimes the stake the author has is the most interesting part of a document. If you take these
factors into account, you should be able to read and understand the historical implications of your
primary source.

REACT TO THE STATEMENTS:

1. Texts are continually re-read and re-negotiated
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

2. Primary text can be made to speak to continuity and discontinuity, to chaos and contradictions.
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

3. Perceptions, values, and biases are elements that are present in all texts.
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________

4. The history student is not the intended audience of the author/ writer.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

5. The most effective and efficient way to discuss and analyze the text is to move step through the
text.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

2.3. APPLICATION (Creativity)

Each student will analyze or evaluate one (1) primary source using content, contextual and author’s
main argument or point of view. The analysis is centered, but not limited to authenticity, credibility,
usefulness, authority and status of the author and its historical importance and significance. You may
choose one of the following primary sources:

1. textbook (of any subject)

2. original contract (any type)
3. school record
4. photograph
5. application letter
6. magazine/ newspaper
7. birth certificate/ marriage certificate/ death certificate
8. written speech
9. thesis
Submit your findings in the short bond paper

3. Assessment Phase:
3.1. Work Activities
Sharp Up Your Mind
1. Choose one (1) essay in Filipino or English. The essay should contain the author’s name and the
title of the essay. Analyze or critically evaluate the essay using contextual analysis as well as the
author’s argument and point of view. Also, kindly identify the historical significance of the text being
examined. Print your answer in a short bond paper and attach the photocopy of the evaluated
answers and examined essay.

3.2. Take Home Tasks

Each student will analyze or evaluate one (1) primary source using content, contextual, and author’s
main argument or point of view. The analysis is centered, but not limited to authenticity, credibility,
usefulness, authority and status of the author and its historical importance and significance. Choose
one among the following primary sources.

1. textbook
2. original contract (any type)
3. school record
4. photograph
5. application letter
6. magazine/ newspaper
7. birth certificate/ marriage certificate/ death certificate
8. written speech
9. thesis book

The report, in written/ printed form must be placed in a short folder.

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF FIRST VOYAGE AROUND THE WORLD BY MAGELLAN BY ANTONIO

PIGAFETTA and ANALYSIS OF PIGAFETTA’S CHRONICLE

Ferdinand Magellan
February 3 1480-April 27, 1521
Portuguese Explorer who organized the Spanish Expeditions to the East Indies from 1519-1522 to
search for western route to the Maluku Islands (the Spice Island) resulting in the first
circumnavigation of the Earth, completed by Juan Sebastian Elcano

Antonio Pigafetta

1491-1531

Italian scholar and explorer from the republic of Venice

He traveled with the Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan and his crew by order of the King
Charles 1 of Spain on their Voyage around the world.

Hiswork became a classic that prominent literary men in the West like William Shakespeare, Michel de
Montaigne and Giambattista Vico referred to the book in their interpretation of the New World.
His travelogue is one of the most important primary sources in the study of pre-colonial Philippines.
His account was also a major referent to the events leading to Magellan’s arrival in the Philippines, his
encounter with local leaders, his death in the hands of Lapu lapu’s forces in the Battle of Mactan and in the
departure of what was left of Magellan’s fleet from the islands.

THE FIRST VOYAGE AROUND THE WORLD BY MAGELLAN

*The document reveals several insights not just in the character of the Philippines during precolonial period, but also on
how the fresh eyes of the European regard a deeply unfamiliar terrain, environment, people and culture.

*Published after Pigafetta returned to Italy.

*Antonio Pigafetta wrote his first hand observation and general impression of the Far East including their
Experiences in the Visayas.
*In Pigafetta’s account, their fleet reached what he called the Ladrones Islands or the “Islands of the Thieves”

“These people have no arms, but use sticks, which have a fishbone at the end. They are poor, but ingenious,
and great thieves, and for the sake of that we called these three islands the Ladrones Islands”.

LADRONES ISLAND

*Presently known as Marianas Islands.

*It is located south-southeast of Japan, west-southwest of Hawaii, north of New Guinea, and east of
Philippines

MARCH 16, 1521

*Pigafetta reported that they reach the isle of Zamal, now Samar, but Magellan decided to land in another
uninhabited island for greater security where they could rest for a few days.

*After two days, March18, nine men came to them and show joy and eagerness in seeing them and welcomed
them with food, drinks, and gifts.

The natives gave them:

 Fish
 Palm wine (uraca)
 Figs
 2 cochos
 Rice (umai)
 cocos

Pigafetta described what seemed like a coconut

“This palm produces a fruit names cocho, which is large as the head, or thereabouts: its first husk is green, and
two fingers in thickness, in it they find certain threads, with which they make the cords for fastening their
boats. Under this husks there is another very hard, and thicker than that of a walnut. They burned this second
rind, and make with it a powder which is useful to them. Under this rind there is a white marrow of a fingers
thickness, which they eat fresh with meat and fish, as we do bread, and it has the taste of almond, and if
anyone dried it he might make bread of it.

“very familiar and friendly”

Willingly showed them different islands and the names of this islands.

They went to Humunu Island (Homonhon) (Watering Place of Good Signs) where they found the first signs
of gold in the island.

They named the island with the nearby islands as the Archipelago of St. Lazarus

March 25, they saw two ballangai (balangay)

ballangai (balangay)

A long boat full of people in Mazzava/ Mazaua.

The leader (king) (Raia Siagu) sent his men to the ship of Magellan.

The king offered to give Magellan a bar of gold and chest of ginger; Magellan declined. Instead Magellan
asked for money for the needs of his ships. The king responded by giving them the needed provisions and food
in chinaware.

Magellan exchanged gifts of robes in Turkish fashions, red cap, knives and mirrors.
The two men expressed their desire to become brothers.

Magellan also boasted of his men in an armor who could not struck with swords and daggers. The king was
fascinated and remarked that men in such armor could be worth one hundred of his men.

Magellan showed other weapons, helmets and artilleries. He also shared his charts and maps and how they
found the islands.

Magellan was introduced to the king’s brother who was also king of another island.

They went to this island and they saw mines of gold.

The gold was abundant that the parts of the ship and the house of the second king were made of gold.

Raia Calambu

King of Zuluan and Calagan (Butuan and Caragua)

Pigafetta described him as the most handsome of all men that he saw in this place.

He was adorned with sick and golden accessories like golden dagger, which he carried with him in a wooden
polished sheath.

March 31 (EASTER SUNDAY)

Magellan ordered the chaplain to preside a Mass by the shore.

The king sent two dead pigs and attended the Mass with the other king.
“…when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings, went to kiss the cross like us, but they offered nothing,
and at the elevation of the body of our Lord they were kneeling like us, and adored our Lord with joined
hands.”

After the Mass, Magellan ordered that the cross be brought with nails and crowned in place.

Magellan explained that the cross, the nail, and the crown were the signs of his emperor and that he was
ordered to plant it in the places that he would reach and the cross would be beneficial for their people because
once the Spaniards saw this cross, then they would know that they had been in this land and would not cause
them troubles, and any person who might be held captives by them would be released.

April 17, 1521

Magellan and his men reached the port of Cebu, the largest and the richest of the islands with the helped of
Raia Calambu.

The king of Cebu (Rajah Humabon) demanded that they pay tribute as it was customary but Magellan
refused.

Magellan said that he was the captain himself and thus would not pay tribute to the other king

Magellan’s interpreter explained to the king of Cebu that Magellan’s king was the emperor of the great
empire and that it would do them better to make friends with them than to forge enmity.

The king consulted his council and the next day, together with the other principal men of Cebu, they met in
an open space and the king offered a bit of his blood demanded that Magellan do the same.
“Thenthekingsaidthathewascontent,andasagreatersignofaffectionhesenthimalittleofhisbloodfromhisrightarm,an
dwishheshoulddothelike.Ourpeopleansweredthathewoulddoit.Besidesthat,hesaidthatallthecaptainswhocametohi
scountryhadbeenaccustomedtomakeapresenttohim,andhetothem,andthereforetheyshouldasktheircaptainifhewou
ldobservethecustom.Ourpeopleansweredthathewould:butasthekingwishedtokeepupthecustom,lethimbeginandm
akeapresent,andthenthecaptainwoulddohisduty.”