MODULE 1 - INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY: Definition, Elements,

Nature and Importance

1.
DEFINITION AND ETYMOLOGY OF HISTORY
History means not just an inquiry but also an investigation. It is like a scientific method. It’s all about facts.
There are process and methods used to arrive the facts.
Facts are dead without historian. It is historians’ job to interpret those facts.
2.
HISTORIOGRAPHY
It is the history of history. Historiography analyzes who is the history writer, the motives of the writer, the
sources of the writer, theories applied and other historical methods. It also analyzes the context when the
history was written.
I. Issues and Problems in Philippine Historiography
 Philippine Historiography has undergone several changes since the precolonial period until present.
 How history is written, is very different depending on the timeline, the era, the people, author or the historian,
and the mentors.
 It’s impossible that those historians alive in pre-colonial period in the Philippines and historians today have
the same discussion, have the same discovery, and have the same presentation of a single topic. Because each
historian is affected on their own background.
 They are the product of their generation.
 The first document that written about the Philippines was written by the Spaniards. The friars are not just a
missionary, they observe the Philippine history and the culture and wrote about it.
 The only available writings about the Philippines during that time is the Spanish because they were the first
ethnographers, they were the first people who observe and wrote about the early filipinos.
 When they wrote about ancestors, it is presented differently because they were friars. They called the early
filipinos that they don't have a religion, they called them uncivilized, they call them practicing witchcraft, and
they called them demonic people.
 They were writing it not because they want to humiliate the Filipinos, but that is what they believed was the
truth based on their background.
 Foreigners even now are ethnocentric; they believe that their culture is superior to others.
 Historian’s job is to put interference to the facts, but the interpretation should always be based on solid
grounds.
A. Correcting the errors of published historical work
 Since most of the primary sources were written in foreign language, errors in translation have happened and
have affected much the writing of history. There was therefore the need to correct errors in publication.
 The job of historiography is to correct errors.
 In history, there’s absolute conclusion, it is dynamic, and it can be changed.
A. Filling the gaps in Philippine History
 There were very few anthropologists and archaeologist in the Philippines hence there are still gaps in some
account or parts of the Philippine history.
B. Reinterpretation of historical facts & events
 Historical Revisionism is a practice in writing history in which historians reinterpret views of causes and
effects, decisions, explanations, and evidence.
D. Rewriting History in the Filipino point of view
 The biggest problem that was raised is the fact that writers were foreigners therefore Philippine history was
mostly written in a foreigner's point of view and not on the point of view of the Filipinos.

II. History as a western concept and Kasaysayan as a Filipino concept

History and kasaysayan are always equated the same. It is founded on the idea that both are studies of the past.
However, for radical
Filipino historians, the two concepts are not synonymous.
History as a western concept
History is a western concept introduced by our colonizers, particularly by the Spaniards.

Filipino historians wanted to have our own version or perspective in writing history like Pantayong pananaw,
pangkaming pananaw, and pansilang pananaw.
 Pantayong pananaw – Only few of our historical documents are written in Filipino or native language.
Most of them are written in English and Spanish.
  Pangkaming pananaw – Historical perspective in which Philippine history is written by Filipinos in foreign
language and intended for to be read by foreigners to understand our history in our point of view.
 Pansilang pananaw - Historical perspective in which Philippine history is written by foreigners in a foreign
language as well and is intended to be read and understood by their fellow foreigners.
3. ELEMENTS OF HISTORY
A. The Historian. This refers to the person writing the history.
B. Place. The location where the history was written
C. Period. Refers to the context of the time when the history was written.
D. Sources. Refers to the basis of claims or analysis of the historian such as documents, written or oral
accounts.
4. NATURE OF HISTORY AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE
A. History has no subject matter of its own.
B. History synthesizes knowledge from other fields.
C. History illuminates pieces of the past.
D. History is constantly changing.
E. History sheds light to truth.
5. IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY OF HISTORY
 It is important because it provides us with the capacity to analyze previous events and phenomena which
therefore will provide us with proper basis on how to view the present and the future.
“A nation with no history, it will be a disaster.”
Our leaders should always look back in history on how to make us better for us not to be repeat it. “Those who forget
the history are condemned to repeat it.” - George Santayana
HISTORY IN RELATION WITH OTHER SOCIAL SCIENCES
Archaeology and Anthropology are very common.
MODULE 2 - Sources of History and Historical Criticisms
1. SOURCES OF HISTORY 
 Historians study the sources that the past has left behind.
 In history, sources are classified mainly into: Primary and Secondary Sources. Primary and secondary
sources form the cornerstones of historical research.
 Any articles, books, that have interpretations, it is not consider a secondary source.
A. Primary Sources 
 A primary source provides direct or firsthand evidence about an event, object, person, or work of art.
 Primary sources are the witnesses of the account like diary, journals, even newspapers, if it came from the
eyewitnesses of that particular account. It is also a legal document.
 Primary sources can be fake.
B. Secondary Sources 
 Secondary sources, on the other hand, are interpretations of history
 Secondary sources examples are videos, pictures etc.
C. Tertiary Sources
 Tertiary sources contain information that has been compiled from primary and secondary sources.
 Tertiary sources include almanacs, chronologies, dictionaries and encyclopedias, directories, guidebooks,
indexes, abstracts, manuals, and textbooks.
D. Types of Historical Sources
1. Archival Material. Manuscripts and archives are primary sources.
 These manuscripts are preserved and should be really handled with care.
2. Government Documents.
3. Serials.
4. Books. Most books are MOSTLY secondary sources. But there are also books that is a primary source.
There are 2 criticisms, the external criticism, and the internal criticism.
2. HISTORICAL CRITICISM
A. External Criticism
 It covers the physical examinations of sources meaning the kind of paper that was written like documents,
manuscripts, books, pamphlets, maps, inscriptions, and monuments.
 It is the problem of authenticity, if the document or the artifacts is genuine, if we can trace its origin, if the
documents or the sources are legit.
a. Authorship.
b. Date and place of publication.
c. Textual errors.
 d. d. Meanings of words used.
B. Internal Criticism 
 Positive criticism refers to understanding of both literal and real meaning of words.
 It is more focused on the content itself of how it is written and analyzation.
 It is the problem of credibility, are the eyewitnesses, credible and reliable.
 Customs of the Tagalog
 Antonio Pigafetta – The first voyage around the world. He was the chronicler of Magellan.
 Juan de Plasencia was a friar who lived in the Philippines, lived among the natives, and learn the language of
the natives. He must make in mind that both are foreigners, both have different profession, and observers.
 These are their first-hand accounts.

Analysis of Antonio Pigaffeta’s Chronicle on Magellan’s

Arrival in the Archipelago

EXCERPTS FROM PIGAFETTA’S ACCOUNT

 They called it Islands of Thieves because islanders took whatever they could from his ship as payment for the
food and water they had given the crew.
 They stole the things from Magellan and his men because they failed to understand it was customary before.
 “Once you visit an island, you must give them something.” So, the natives thought that the things Magellan
and his men was carrying were for them. They thought it was a customary practice. Magellan doesn't
understand that there should be exchanging of gifts. or they should have something to give to the natives of the
island.
 Pigafetta is not a historian, he’s a geographer.
 In the pigafetta’s account, he described them as black naked because they keep on comparing the way they
cloth themselves, the way the European cloth themselves. He became ethnocentric, he thought that his culture
is superior to the cultures of those islander or the early filipinos he encountered.
 Even magellan when they saw the idols they worship, when they saw how these people worship the stones and
the trees.
 Before the coming of Christianity, early filipinos are animist. They worship everything especially the nature,
moon, sun, trees, river and more.
 In the concept of animism, it believes everything has a soul.
 When they saw it, they said it was a practice of devil worship.
 Even Plasencia said it was a practice of witchcraft.
 The term paganism and witchcraft are brought by the Europeans.
 Our ancestors never see themselves as vegans because what they believe, what they practice is also as their
religion the same with Christianity or Catholicism
 Cavite Mutiny
1872 Cavite Mutiny Filipino Perspective – It is said that it is a goal of the locals to remove the Spanish government
from the Philippines, due to the removal of the privileges by Filipino workers in the arsenal in Cavite firearms
factory.
1) Pag-aalis mula sa pagkilala
2) Sapilitang paggawa sa pagtrabaho
3) Pagkaltas ng kanilang suweldo
4) Pagtanggal ng kanilang benipisiyo
5) Pagkawala ng sariling Karapatan
1872 Cavite Mutiny Spanish Perspective – Filipinos really planned and establish to open a monarchy government
with the leader as a Filipino priest and call it as a “king”
 On January 27, 1872, Governor-General Rafael Izquierdo approved the death sentences on forty-one of the
mutineers.
 Three priests were sentenced to death by garrison in front of a large crowd and charged with treason and
sedition
There were three authors but generally it divided to Filipino perspective and Spanish perspective. It is considered to
be a two point of view. It is also the official records of the Cavite Mutiny.
 The mutiny is not a revolution. It was an attempt to overthrow the Spanish government, but it was strike of
those workers from the arsenal because they wanted that those privileges given from the previous governor
general dela torre will be given back to them because it is where the took them all. It was not just a mutiny of
this soldiers of the cavite arsenal, but it was a conspiracy, it was a fraud.
 Jose Montero y Vidal supported the claim of Izquierdo and said the leaders of the revolution were actually the
gomburza.
 Without the events of 1872 cavite mutiny, followed by the execution of gomburza, there will be no Filipino
national consciousness.
 Before the Philippine revolution or the built Katipunan, the feeling of nationhood sound belief it started the
seed was then planted as early as 1872 although the Philippine revolution happened in 1896, it took time.
 Even the young rizal who did not witness but they know the story of the gomburza later in his young adult life.
He dedicated his second novel to them.
 The impact of the gomburza was then felt by many heroes that we know today.
- Joaquin Pardo de Tavera is the uncle of Trinidad Pardo de Tavera.
- It is considered a primary source because it was based on primary testimonies of those involve in a trial, and he lives
during that time, but then new document appeared.
- According to john that “A document was now supporting the claim of Governor izquierdo” and “It is really not a
mutiny but actually it was a revolt and those who attack the Cavite arsenal where actually not even soldiers but
masons’ people. These masons were the leader of the conspiracy to revolt.

Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of General

Santiago Alvarez was an eyewitness during the tejeros convention, making this document a primary source.
History of the Filipino People
Mga Gunita ng Himagsikan