READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

(Reviewer)

Lesson 1
History: Introduction and Historical Sources

History refers to the study and interpretation by a historian on the data and other source of the
past human activity, people, societies, and civilizations leading to the present day.
 First, history as we all know is based on past events.
 Second, it is interpreted by someone usually by historian. They gather, discard and
interpret the sources that they encounter.
 And finally, and the most important history rely on data and documents which historian call as
historical sources.

Etymologically, the word history came from the Greek word Historia which means inquiry. Clearly
the word Historia does not mean past events. It denotes asking question or investigation of the past done
by person trained to do so or by persons who are interested in human past.

Historian is an expert or student of history, especially that of a particular period, geographical region,
or social phenomenon. There are many duties of a historian. These historians seek not only historical
evidence and facts but also to interpret these facts.

Some comments of the Historians about History

 George Orwell – “The most effective way to destroy the people is to deny and obliterate their
own understanding of history.
 Robert Penn Warren – “The lack of a sense of history is the damnation of the modern world.”
 A.J.P. Taylor – “History is not just a catalogue of events put in the right order like a railway
timetable.”
 Michael Crichton – “If you don’t know history, then you don’t know anything. You are a leaf
that doesn’t know it is a part of a tree.”
 Karl Max – “History of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”
 Confucius – “Study the past if you would define the future.”
 Victor Hugo – “Let us study things that are no more necessary to understand, if only to avoid
them.”

SOURCES OF HISTORY
Historical sources are tangible remains of the past. It is an object from the past or
testimony concerning the past on which historians depend in order to create their own depiction of the
past. There are three kinds of sources namely: primary, secondary, and tertiary sources.

Primary Sources – are materials produced by people or groups directly involved in the event or topic
being studied. These sources range from diaries, eyewitness accounts, letters, legal documents, official
documents (government or private), and even photographs.

Five main categories of PRIMARY SOURCES:

1. Written Sources or Documents – they are written or printed materials that have been produced in
one form or another sometime in the past. They may be publishing materials such as travelogues,
transcriptions of speeches, autobiographies, journals, or newspapers.
2. Numerical Records – includes any type of numerical data in printed or handwritten form.
3. Oral Statements – include any form of statement made orally by an eyewitness. It may be through
video recordings, audio recordings, or transcribed.
4. Relics – are any objects whose physical or visual characteristics can provide some information
about the past.
5. Images – these include artifacts, ruins, and fossils.

Secondary Sources – interpret and analyze primary source. It is reviewed, organized, or interpreted, often
with the help of other secondary sources.
1. Biographies
2. Critical reviews
3. Textbooks

Tertiary Sources – they provide third-hand information by reporting ideas and details from the secondary
sources. An eyewitness is more reliable than testimony at second hand, which is more reliable than
hearsay.
1. Dictionaries
2. Encyclopedias
3. Handbooks
Lesson 2
Historical Criticisms

Historical Criticisms – is also known as the historical-critical method.

- is a branch of criticism that investigates the origin of a text or source in order to
understand the meaning behind the text.

The primary goal of historical criticism is to discover the text’s primitive or original historical context and
its literal sense. The secondary goal seeks to establish a reconstruction of the historical situation of the
author and the recipients of the text.

External criticism
- This type of criticism looks for the obvious signs of forgery or misrepresentation.
- This type of criticism tests the authenticity of the sources. It is interested in the writing style of the
eyewitness and his ignorance of the facts.

Internal criticism
-it refers to the accuracy of the content of a document. It has to do with what the document says.
-It investigates the content or substance of a document and the author's point of view.
-this type of criticism tests the credibility of the source.

Test of Authenticity
-the first step to testing a source is to determine the date of the document to see whether it is
anachronistic.
-the second step is to determine the author's handwriting, signature, or seal.
-the third test in determining the authenticity of the source is by looking for the anachronistic style.
-the fourth test is the anachronistic reference to events.

Test of Credibility
-the first step is the identification of the author.
-the second step in testing the credibility of the eyewitness is to determine the approximate date.
-the third step in testing the credibility of the source is its ability to tell the truth.
-the fourth step is the willingness to tell the truth.
-the last step is to look for corroboration.

CONTENT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PRIMARY SOURCES

A. Background of the author/creator
first, the researcher must provide a brief biographical sketch of the author or creator of the
primary source. Family background, educational attainment, religion, and many others shall be
given priority in presenting the biography of the author.

B. Background of the document/primary source

1. Basic background of the source, like the type of primary source.
a. Parts/chapter
b. Time allotted
c. Location of the source
2. Check the authenticity of the source.
a. Origin of the document
b. Intended audience
c. Creator in the time of creation
3. Look for the purpose or motive of the source.
a. Understand the historical context
b. Do a background research
c. Look at important historical event at the time the source was made
d. Ascertain intended audience
C. Content analysis of the important historical information found in the document
First, look for corroboration between the research you gather from the Internet and the
primary source that your instructor has given to you. They may not use the exact same words, or
they may express the same information in different ways, but we can still use them as
corroboration.
Next, in order to analyze the primary source, look for bias. There is a bias when a
source’s information is unbalanced or prejudiced. There are two kinds of bias: either it is strongly
positive ( strongly in favor of) or strongly negative (strongly against).
Most of the primary sources that we will encounter a written document, so we will focus
our attention on those kinds of primary sources.
 If the document is silent or when the source is intentionally leaves important information
of which you are aware from other sources. Examples of this silent bias is the declaration of the
Philippine independence.
The last is if there are obvious errors or when the source provides information that you
know to be false from alternative sources.
D. Contribution and relevance of the document in understanding the grand narrative of
Philippine history
In this activity, look for the cause and consequences of the primary sources. A cause is a
person or thing that makes something happen, while a consequence is a direct result of the cause.
An example is the arrival of Ferdinand Magellan.
E. Relevance of the documents to the present time
Look for the historical significance or what modern people consider to be important from
the past. There are many events in our history we have to choose from, but few people, events, or
ideas to focus on.

Lesson 3
One Past but Many History

THE FIRST MASS SITE IN THE PHILIPPINES

Limasawa in Leyte or Masao in Butuan?

1998 – National Historical Institute declared that Limasawa island is the place where the first mass site in
the Philippines.

March 31, 1521 (Easter Sunday) – According to Antonio Pigaffeta, the mass was celebrated on this
date.
Mazaua- Pigaffeta referred to the venue of the first mass as “Mazaua”.
March 28, 1521 – According to the Journal of Pigaffeta, these explorers first landed in the Philippines on
this date, they saw a bonfire which turned out to be Mazaua (believed to be today’s Limasawa)
where they anchored

The first mass was presided by Fr. Pedro Valderama

Accounts:
Francisco Albo- Logbook; pilot, one of the 18 survivors who accompanied Sebastian del Cano in going
back to spain.
Antonio Pigafetta – First Voyage Around the World; Italian novelman, cartographer and geographer
who was sent by the king of Spain together with Magellan to document their voyage to the easter
islands.

Miguel A. Bernard “Butuan or Limasawa: The site of the first mass in the pihilippines: A re-examination
of the evidence” published 1981

According to Francisco Albo, on March 16, 1581 they sailed in the westerly course from Ladrones, they
saw land towards the northwest; but owing to many shallow places they did not approach it. They
found later that its name was Yunagan.
- sailing towards along the coast of the large island of Seilani, they turned southwest to a
small island called “Masava” That Island is also at a latitude 9 and two thirds degree north, which
is the southern tip of leyte.

Antonio Pigafetta – Saturday, March 16, 1521. Magellan’s expedition sighted a “high land” named
“Zamal” which was some 300 leagues westward of Ladrones (now the Marianas Islands)
- Sunday, March 17, 1521 – After signing Zamal island, they landed on another
land which was uninhabited and which lay to the right of the above mentioned Zamal;

TWO FACES OF THE 1872 CAVITE MUTINY

There will be no 1896 Philippine revolution if there was no 1872 Cavite Mutiny.

Mutiny – form of rebellion against authority., old verb mutine which means revolt.
Two major events happened in 1872:
-1872 Cavite Mutiny
-Martyrdom of the three martyr priests in the persons of Fathers Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos, and
Jacinto Zamora (GOMBURZA)

The real reason for the Cavite Mutiny:

The Cavite Mutiny is the name of natives to get rid of the Spanish government in the Philippines, due to
the removal of privileges enjoyed with laborers of the Cavite arsenal such as exemption from the
tribute and forced labor.

What happened during the Cavite mutiny of 1872?

January 20, 1872 – Cavite Mutiny
- the brief uprising of 200 Filipino troops and workers at the Cavite arsenal, became
an excuse for Spanish repression of the embryonic Philippine nationalist movement. ironically,
the harsh reaction of this Spanish authorities served ultimate to promote the nationalist cause.

Filipino version of the Cavite Mutiny:

Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo De Tavera – Filipino scholar and researcher, wrote a filipino version of
the bloody incident in cavite.
The incident was merely a mutiny by Filipino soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal to the
dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies of Izquierdo
abolition of privileges in prohibition of the founding of the school of arts and trades.
Cavite mutiny - the uprising of military personnel of Fort San Felipe (Spanish arsenal) on January 20,
1872.
Around 200 soldiers and laborers rose up in the belief that it would elevate to a national uprising.
The mutiny was unsuccessful and government soldiers executed many of the participants.

GOMBURZA - collective name of the three martyred priest. Tagged as the masterminds of the Cavite
mutiny.
-they were prominent Filipino priests charged with treason and sedition.
-the Spanish clergy connected the priest to the mutiny as part of a conspiracy to stifle the
movement of secular priests who desired to have their own parishes instead of being assistance to
regular Friars.
Garrote -killing someone by strangulation typically with an iron wire or cord.
February 17, 1872 – The GOMBURZA were executed by garrote in public to serve as threat to the
Filipinos never to attempt to fight the Spaniards again. this is a scene proposedly witnessed by a
young Jose Rizal.

Spanish version
Jose Montero y Vidal - a prolific Spanish historian documented the event and highlighted it as an attempt
of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines
Meanwhile Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdos official report to the king of Spain magnified the
event and made use of it implicate the native clergy which was then active in the call for
secularization

Secularization – magkaroon ng magandang katungkulan ang mga native clergies dito sa Pilipinas na hindi
nagustuhan ng mga prayleng Espanyol.

1872 - a part of a big conspiracy among educated learners mestizos, lawyers and residents of Manila and
cavite they allegedly plan to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers then kill friars.
January 20, 1872 - does district of sampaloc celebrated the feast of the virgin loreto came with it were
fireworks display. The cavitenos mistook this as the signal to commence with the attack.
200 men was led by sergeant lamadrid attack spanish officers at site and seized the arsenal.
Izquierdo, upon learning the attack ordered reinforcement of Spanish forces in cavite to quell the revolt
The revolution was easily crushed, when manilenos who were expected to aid the cavitenos did not arrive

Filipino Version – it is a simple mutiny by the native Filipino soldiers and laborers of the cavite arsenal
who turned out to be dissatisfied with the abolition of their privileges.
Spanish version – an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines.

Cavite Mutiny
Death of Gomburza
Jose Rizal’s El Filibusterismo/Noli me Tangere
1896 Philippine Revolution

CRY OF BALINTAWAK OR PUGADLAWIN

The controversy among historians continues to the present day. The “Cry of Pugad
Lawin” (August 23, 1896) cannot be accepted as historically accurate. It lacks positive
documentation and supporting evidence from the witness. The testimony of only one eyewitness (Dr. Pio
Valenzuela) is not enough to authenticate and verify a controversial issue in history. Historians and their
living participants, not politicians and their sycophants, should settle this controversy.

Dr. Pio Valenzuela’s versions of the Cry of Balintawak:

1911 - cry took place on August 23 at Apolonio Samson’s house in Balintawak
1935 – Cry of Revolution did not happen in Balintawak but in Pugad Lawin
1964-1978 – Valenzuela’s memoir averred that the Cry took place on August 23 at the house of Juan
Ramos at Pugad Lawin.

Turning point of Historical Controversy:

1983 – There was an old dap-dap tree at the former residence of Juan Ramos when NHI conducted its
survey in 1983.
Teodoro Agoncillo, Gregorio Zaide, and Pio Valenzuela – they did not mention a dap-dap tree in their
books.
As a result, Valenzuela’s main proponent of the “Pugad Lawin” version was dead by the time the
committee conducted its research.
Sofronio Calderon – He is a writer and linguist who conducted research in the late 1920s on the
toponym (name of a place) “Pugad Lawin”. He went through the municipal records of 1903 and 1918 and
could not find the name.
- He concluded “Isang…pagkakamali… and sabihing mayroong Pugad Lawin sa
Kalookan”
The “Cry of Pugad Lawin” on August 23, 1986 cannot be accepted as historically accurate.

Why are there conflicts and controversies

1. Historians could be subjective in their interpretations. There are times where they could be bias
on the backgrounds or bias in interpretation of artifacts as artifacts can’t speak for themselves.
2. There are a lot of perspectives in history.