Readings in Philippine History:

Lecture 1
By
Restituto R. Ramos, M.A.
Introduction to History as a Discipline
• When we are looking for a job,
• A prospective employer would surely ask for
our qualifications if it is suitable for the job
applied for.
• In so doing, it is not enough to give a simple
yes or no answer.
• One must narrate with documentary
evidence, one’s story, particularly on how the
qualifications were earned.
• One must show documents and papers which
detail these qualifications.
• These are usually in the form of transcript of
records, diplomas and other papers which
prove the qualifications have been duly
earned.
• These are what usually are called the “facts”
of history.
• For example, everybody knows that Miguel
Lopez de Legazpi conquered and made Manila
the capital of the Philippines on June 24,
1571.
Legazpi-Urdaneta Monument, Manila
• But it is not enough to simply narrate the
event.
• For one must explain in a cohesive and
forceful manner how the event came about.
• For the Spaniards under Legazpi did not
simply come to the Philippines.
• One must trace its roots to the arrival of
Ferdinand Magellan to these islands half-a-
century before.
Magellan Monument, Mactan, Cebu
• One must also study the circumstances which
led the Spanish Government of that time to
prepare an expedition to the East Indies and
appoint the Portuguese-born Magellan to be
its commander.
• To go about this, one must read about the
events which led to this, and the primary
sources which narrate these, both published
and unpublished.
• In this aspect, this is how the discipline of history
is conducted.
• One must have the patience to search for records
about the past event or events being studied,
often in dingy archives, or interview possible
informants in oral history.
• Since one can never know with certainty how
much or how little past events were documented,
it is often not possible to write with finality any
historical event.
• For any previously-undiscovered document
might surface and be found by another
scholar or by the same scholar who tried
researching for an event earlier but did not
discover that document at that time.
• Hence, the tentativeness of historical
conclusions.
• The study of history has sometimes been classified as
part of the humanities and at other times as part of
the social sciences. It can also be seen as a bridge
between those two broad areas, incorporating
methodologies from both, which could indicate that is
somewhat between the two. Some individual
historians strongly support one or the other
classification.
• In the 20th century, French historian Fernand
Braudel revolutionized the study of history, by using
such outside disciplines as economics, anthropology,
and geography in the study of global history.
History by Frederick
Dielman (1896)
 Can History be Objective?
• The question may be asked: Can history be
objective?
• For sure, it has to be written with a point of
view
• So, one’s philosophy of history may influence
one’s conclusions, even choice of material for
research
• One example is the Marxist perspective, which
sees history and historical events as a class
struggle between the upper classes and the
masses
• Which was in vogue in Philippine academia
from the late 1960s until recently, especially at
the University of the Philippines
 Colonial Perspective
• Another earlier perspective is the colonial
perspective, both Spanish and later, the
American
• This views the colonizer as the primary actor
in history and only writes about the colonized
• This definitely downplays the role of the
colonized and emphasizes the colonizer
• Even then, we cannot ignore the records from
the past even if they are from the colonizer
• Records are records, and they are still
evidence
• The challenge is how to go through their
colonial bias,
• and finally see the Filipinos as the main actors
in their struggle for nationhood.
 Relative Objectivity
• Well, the aim of any historian may be relative
objectivity, since complete objectivity is totally
impossible as explained above
• The historian, researching and writing with a
point of view, may do his work and try to
obtain a relatively objective conclusion
• How could this be done?
• The historian then, will have to be honest with
the conclusions of his research and must try to
back them up with “hard evidence.”
• The evidence, uncovered by his research, will
have to support his conclusions and stand up
to intensive scrutiny by others, especially by
fellow scholars
• Definitely, this is the ultimate responsibility of
the historian
• The emphasis now is to provide the students
with primary sources for historical data and
which they will read and scrutinize by
themselves.
• Instead of just merely requiring them to
memorize historical facts and figures in order
to be able to answer questions based on these
data,
• the students would now be made to think and
analyse the facts given to them,
• and to be critical in doing so
 Two Definitions of History
• Ordinarily, history usually means are the
events which actually happened in the past or
history as actuality.
• This depends on primary sources such as
official government documents, diaries,
memoirs and eyewitnesses to the events.
• As such, varying and often conflicting accounts
about primary sources cannot be avoided.
• So, the need for the intervention of a historian
in order to give a logical interpretation to
these often conflicting accounts and
narratives.
• This often results in the impression by readers
that the interpretation made by the writer
(may be a historian or not) as a primary source
also but upon close scrutiny, the book one is
reading belongs to secondary sources.
• This means that this reference, although
secondary, is merely a perspective or
interpretation that is coming from the present
time.
• Included herein is the controversial date of the
Cry of Pugad Lawin, which many documents
give varying dates for its occurrence despite
the fact that accounts of the event were
written by eyewitnesses to it.
• Besides varying and often conflicting ideas
that give interpretation.
• An interpretation is also made on the
classification of the primary sources used if
these can be trusted.
• The thought transmitted by the primary
source depends on its credibility, so it also an
issue to determine the authenticity of a
source.
• Although all those who engage in the study of
history can give an interpretation.
• Not all have the capability to give a logical
interpretation of history.
• A logical interpretation is usually accepted by
all, especially if the source being given
interpretation is corroborated by other
sources.
Introduction to Philippine History and
Nationhood
• When Philippine National Hero Jose Rizal was
born in 1861, there was no Filipino nation to
speak of as we know today.
• There was no bayan, only mga bayan.
• Bayan originally meant “community:
• Over time, as the Spanish missionaries
founded pueblos or towns, bayan came to
mean the pueblo.
• When we say that there was no Filipino nation
in 1861, what we mean is that the existing
communities (towns and villages) , whether
Christian, Muslim or animist, did not think of
themselves as forming one community.
• When Rizal died in 1896, there was still no
nation to speak of, but there was a nation to
dream of.
• This was the nation Rizal chose to die for, the
subject matter of his two novels and of his last
poem, the object of his political campaigns in
Spain, and the reason for his exile.
• After Rizal’s execution, the still nonexistent
nation felt more real, because it had just
claimed the life of one of its fairest sons, and
no phantom or illusion could do this.
• What does it mean to be a product of history?
It is not easy to give a brief answer to this
question; on the other hand, you will be in a
better position to answer it at the end of the
course.
• For the moment, we can compare history to
the environment in which persons flourish in
all their particular place (or places),
interacting with particular people.
• That is the meaning of the Tagalog expression
tumubo, as in tinubuang bayan.
• A plant takes root in and grows in a particular
soil with its nutrients; it takes in sunlight and
rain; it is nourished by the farmer and
damaged by beasts. So, too with the people.
• Tumutubo ang tao
• In the case of Rizal, the rich soil was the town of
Calamba in the province of Laguna and his family
and the evolving colonial society.
• The sun of liberalism was shining, both because
of and in spite of the exuberance of industrial
powers, and rain and education watered the soil.
• Fresh winds were blowing: the port of Manila was
opened to international trade, and wealth flowed
into native Filipino hands.
• A storm across the seas had blown down the
Spanish empire in the Americas, leaving only
Cuba and Puerto Rico intact; a smaller storm
in the Philippines seemed to be threatening
Spanish authority: Filipino secular priests,
both Spanish and native, questioned the
preferential treatment the Spanish
government was giving friars from Spain.
• The Spanish governor-general decided to put
an end to this by executing three Filipino
priests, two of whom were prominent in
petitioning for fairness. We know the three
priests by the acronym “GOMBURZA.”
• In the Noli me tangere, Rizal compares their
execution to a lightning bolt that created life.
• The life was the anti-friar movement in Manila
and the movement demanding civil liberties.
• The year the three priests were executed in
Manila was also the year Rizal began his high
school education at the Ateneo Municipal de
Manila (now the Ateneo de Manila
University).