Chapter 1 Meaning and Relevance of History. Overview The word history now means “the past of mankind.” This meaning of the word history is often encountered in such overworked phrases as “all history teaches” or “the lesson of history. As used by the Greek philosopher Aristotle, history meant a systematic account of a set of natural phenomena, whether or not chronological ordering was a factor in the account; and that usage, though rare, still prevails in English in the phrase natural history. In the course of time, however, the equivalent Latin word scientia (English, science) came to be,used more regularly to designate non-chronological systematic accounts of natural phenomena;, and the word history was reserved usually for accounts of phenomena (especially human affairs) in chronological order. It requires only a moment's reflection to recognize that in this sense history cannot be reconstructed./The past of mankind for the most part is beyond recall. Even those who are blessed with the best memories cannot re-create their own past, since in the life of all men there must be events, persons, words, thoughts, places, and fancies that made no impression at all at the time they occurred or have since been forgotten’ A fortiori, the experience of a generation long dead, most of whom left no records or whose records, if they exist, have never been disturbed by the historian’s touch, is beyond the‘ possibility, of total recollection. The reconstruction of the total past of mankind, although it is the goal of historians, thus becomes a goal they know full well is unattainable (Gottschalk 1969). : i The Objectivity and Subjectivity in History Gottschalk (1969) states that ssometimes objects like ruins, parchmnents; and ‘coins survive from the past. Otherwise,the facts of history are derived from testimony and therefore are facts of meaning’ They cannot be see, felt, tasted, heard, or kmeléa They may be said to be symbolic or representative of something that once was teal, but they have no objective reality of their own! In other words, they exist only in the observer's or historlan’s mizid (dnd thus,may.be called “subjective”). To be studied objectively (that is, with the intention of acquiring detached and truthful knowledge independent of one’s personal reactions), a thing must first bean object; it must have an independent existence outside the human minds Recollections however, do not have existence outside the human mind; and most of history is based Upon recollections —|that is, written or spoken testimony. | A vulgar prejudice exists against “subjective” knowledge as inferior to “objective” knowledge, largely because the word “subjective” has also come to mean “illusory” or “based upon personal considerations,” and hence either “untrue” or “biased”. Impartiality and “objectivity,” to be sure, may be more difficult to obtain from such data, and hence conclusions based upon them may be more debatable; but such data and conclusions, if true, are not necessarily inferior to other kinds of knowledge per se. The word subjective is not used here to imply the necessity for the application of special kinds of safeguards against error. Artifacts in History Only where relics of human happenings can be found ~ a potsherd, a coin, a ruin, a manuscript, a book, a portrait, a stamp, a piece of wreckage, a strand of hair, or other archeological or anthropological remains — do we have objects other than words that the historian can study. These objects, however, are never the happenings or the events themselves. If artifacts, they are the results of events; if written documents, they may be the results or the records of events. Whether artifacts or documents, they are raw materials out of which history may be written. Source: ancient-origins.net The a late Inscription E Ee eeaioe Mies be gum maatetoretie the vodiedandleg of fe aso of tha Philippines. The Laguna Copperplate Inscription is an important artifact, as it has allowed scholars to re-evaluate the situation io this part of Southeast Asia during the 1oth century AD.To be sure, certain historical truths can be derived immediately from such materials. The historian can discover that a piece of pottery was handwrought, that a building was made of mortared brick, that a manuscript was written in a cursive hand, that a painting was done in oils, that sanitary plumbing was known in an old city, and many other such data from direct observation of artifacts surviving from the past. The historian deals with the dynamic or genetic (the becoming) as well as the static (the being or the become) and he aims at being interpretative (explaining why and how things happened and were intertelated), as well as descriptive (telling what happened, when and where, and who took part). Besides, such descriptive data as can be derived directly and immediately from surviving artifacts are only a small part of the periods to which they belong. A historical context can be given to them only if they ean be placed in a human setting. That human beings lived in the brick building with sanitary plumbing, ate out of the handwrought pottery, and admired the oil painting that were mentioned above might perhaps easily be inferred. But the inference may just as easily be mistaken, for the building might have been a stable, the piece of pottery might have been’ from a ‘roof-tile, the painting might have been a hidden-away relic with no admirers whatsoever; ahd’ an infinity of other suppositions is possible. Without further evidence ‘the human context of these artifacts can never be recaptured with any degree of certainty. " The Incompk in History ———— Only a part of what was observed in the past was remembered by those who observed it; “Only a part of what was remembered was recorded; ~ Only a part of what was recorded has survived; Only a part of what has survived has one to the historians’ attention; oe Only a part of what has come to their attention is credible; Only a patt of what is credible has been grasped; erase: exits And only a part of what bas been grasped can be expounded or narrated by historian." " -Louis Gottschalk Unfortunately, for most of the past we not only have no further evidence of the'human setting in which to place surviving artifacts; we do not even have the artifacts. Most human affairs happen without leaving vestiges or records of any kind behind them. The past, having 4happened, has gone with only few traces. To begin with, absolute number of historical writings is staggering, only a small part of what happened in the past was ever observed. A moment's reflection is sufficient to establish that fact. How much, for example, of what you do, ‘Say, or think is ever observed by anyone? Multiply your unobserved actions, thoughts, words, and physiological Processes by 2,000,000,000, and you will get a rough estimate of the amount of unobserved happenings that go in the world all the time. And only a part of what was observed in the past was remembered by those who observed it; only a part of what was remembered was recorded; only a part of what was recorded has survived; only a part of what has survived has come to the historians’ attention; only a part of what has come to their attention is credible; only a part of what is credible has been grasped; and only a part of what has been grasped can be expounded or narrated by historian. The whole history of the past (what has been called history-as-actuality) can be known to him only through the surviving record of it (history-as-record), and most of history-as-record is only the surviving part of the recorded part of the remembered part of the observed part of that whole. Even when the record of the past is derived directly from archeological or anthropological remains, they are yet only the scholars’ selected parts of the discovered parts of the chance survivals from the total past. In so far as the historian has an external object to study it is not the perished history that actually happened (history-as-actuality) but the surviving records of what happened (history-as-record). History can be told only form history-as-record; and history as told (spoken-or-written-history) is only the historians’ expressed part of the understood part of the credible part of the discovered part of history-as-record. Before the past is set forth by the historian, it is likely to have gone through eight separate steps at each of which some of it has been lost; and there is no guarantee that what remains is the most important, the largest, the most valuable, the most representative, or the most enduring part. In other words, the “object” that the historian studies is not only incomplete; it is markedly variable as records are lost or rediscovered. Recreating History From this probably inadequate remainder the historian must do what he can to restore the total. past of mankind. He has no way of doing it but in terms of his own experience. According to Gottschalk (1969) that experience, however, will taught him the following: 51, That yesterday was different form today in some ways as well as the Same 48 today in others. 2. That his own experience is both like and unlike other men’s. It is not alone his own memories interpreted in the light of his own experience that he must try to apply to the understanding of historical survivals; it is the memories of many other people as well. But one's own memories are abstract images, not realities, and one’s reconstructions of others’ memories, even when reinforced by contemporary records and relics, are likely to be even more abstract. Thus, the utmost the historian can grasp of history-as- actuality, no matter how real it may have seemed while it was happening, can be nothing more than a mental image or a series of mental images based upon an application’ of his own experience, real and vicarious, to part of a part of a part of a part of a part of a part of a part of a part of a vanished whole. In short, the historian’s aim a verisimilitude with regard to a perished part — a subjective Process ~ rather than experimental certainly with regard to an objective reality,, He tries to get as close an approximation to the truth, about the past as constant correction of his mental images will allow, at the same time recognizing that that truth has in fact eluded him forever. Here is the essential difference between the study of man’s past and of man’s physical environment. Physies, for example, has an extrinsic and whole object to study ~ the physical universe — that does not change because the physicist is studying it, no matter how much his understanding of it may change; history has only detached and scattered objects to study that do not together make up the total objects that the historian is studying — the past of mankind — and that object, having largely disappeared, exists only in ad’far as his always incomplete and frequently changing understanding of it can re-create it. Some of the natiral scientists, such as geologists and paleozoologists, in so far as the objects they ‘study are traces from a perished past, greatly resemble historians in this regard, but differ fiom them, on the other hand, in so far as historians have to deal with human testimony as well as physical traces. Once the historian understands his predicament, his task is simplified. His responsibility shifts from the obligation to acquire a complete knowledge of the irrecoverable past by means of the surviving evidence to that of re-creating a verisimilar image of as much of the past as the evidence makes recoverable. ‘The latter task is the easier one. For the historian history becomes only that part of the human Past which can be meaningfully reconstructed form the available records and from inferences regarding their setting.The Historical Method Historical methodd is the process of critically examining and analyzing the records and survivals of the past. Historiography is the imaginative reconstruction of the past from the data derived by that process. By means of historical method and historiography the historian endeavors to reconstruct as much of the past of mankind as he can. Even in this limited effort, however, the historian is handicapped. He rarely can tell the story even of a part of the past “as it actually occurred,” because in addition to the probable incompleteness of the records, he is faced with the inadequacy of the human imagination and of human speech for such an “actual” re- creation. But he can endeavor, to use a geometsician's phrase, to approach the actual past “as a limit.” For the past conceived of as something that “actually occurred” places obvious limits "upon the kinds of record and of imagination that he may use. He must be sure that bis records really come from the past and are in fact what they seem to be’ and that his imagination is directed toward re-creation and not creation. These limits distinguish history from fiction, poetry, drama, and fantasy. Historian at Work Historians are people with some advanced training in the discipline of history. They bring a particular and often-misunderstood set of skills to the task of learning about the past. They also gather and weigh different kinds of evidence, including primary sources, material artifacts, and secondary sources.The historian is not permitted to imagine things that could not reasonably have happened. For certain purposes that we examine he may imagine things that might have happened. It is platitude that the historian who knows contemporary life best will understand past life best. Since the human mentality has not changed noticeably in historic times, present generations can understand past generations in terms of their own experience. ‘Those historlans'can make the best analogies and contrasts who have the greatest awareness of possible analogies and coritrasts — that ig,. the widest range of experience, imagination, wisdom, and knowledge. Unfortunately, no platitude tells how to acquire a wide range of those desirable qualities and knowledge or how to transfér them to an understanding of the past. For they are not accumulated alone by precept or example, industry and prayer, though all of these may help. And so, historiography, the synthesizing of historical data into narrative or expositions by writing history books and articles or delivering history lectures, is not easily made the subject of rules and regulations. Some room must be left for native talent and inspirations, and perhaps that is a good thing. But since precepts and examples may help, an, effort will be made to set forth a few of them (Gottschalk 1969). Historiography i . ‘Vann (2017) states that Historiography is the writing of history, especially the writing of history based on the critical examination of sources, thé selection of particular details from the authentic materials in those sources, and the synthesis of those details into a narrative that stands the test of critical examination. It can also refer to the theory and history of historical writing. : nye » Modern historians aim to reconstruct a record of human activitiés and to achieve a more profound understanding of them. This conception of their task is quite recent, dating from the development in the late 18% and early 19" centuries of-“sciéntific” history and the simultaneous tise of history as‘an academic profession. It springs from an outlook that is very new in human experience: the assumption that the study of history is a natural, inevitable human activity. History was almost never an important part of regular education and it never claimed ta provide an interpretation of human life as a whole. This larger ambition was more appropriate to. religion, philosophy, and perhaps poetry and other imaginative literature.Brief History of Uistoriography All human cultures tell stories about the past. Deed of our Filipino ancestors, stories of pu,, Jose_Rizal, Andres Bonifacio and Apolinario Mabini. Their our heroes like Zapu ited by the very fact of their continued repetition. History, which may be existence was authentica defined as an account that purports to be true of events and ways of thinking and feeling in some part of the human pasts, stems from this archetypal human narrative activity. While sharing a common ancestry with myth, legend, epic, poetry and the novel, history has of course diverged from these forms. Its claim to truth is based in part on the fact that all the persons or events it describes really existed or occurred at sometime in the past. Historians can nothing about these persons or events that cannot be supported, or at least suggested by some kind of documentary evidence. Such evidence customarily takes the form of something written such as letter, a law, an administrative record or the account of some previous historian. In additions, historians sometimes create their own evidence by interviewing people. Modern historians have already studies new social classes. Early histories were mostly stories of disasters like flood, famines, plagues and wars including the statesmen and generals figured in them. In the 20 century, however, historians shifted their focus from statesmen and generals to ordinary workers and soldiers. Until relatively recent times, however, most men and virtually all women were excluded from history because they were unable to write. Modern Historical Evidences According to Vann (2017) the 20" century the scope of historical evidence was greatly “expanded to include: 1. Aerial photographs 2. Rings of trees 3. Old coins 4. Clothes 5. Pictures 6. Motions pictures 7. Houses‘Sourée: filipinonumismatist.com ld Spanish Period Coins Old coins are important historical source. It constitutes a major body of economic, artistic and historical evidence of the past. Ancient Historiographies In the beginning it was only spoken word. Human lives for tens of thousands of years with language, and thus with tales about the past, but without writing, The historical record starts only with a system of writing. According to Vann (2017) the following are ancient historiographies: é r ers 1. Chinese Historiography. A ich and persistent annalistic tradition and a growing emphasis on history as a repertoire of moral’ examples characterized ‘the earliest Chinese historiography. The first Chinese historians were apparently temipl¢é archivists; as the, bureaucratic structure of the Chinese state, developed. History gained prestige through the thought of the philosopher Confucius. The foundational text of Chinese historiography is the Shuji (Historical Records) which was compiled by Sima Qian. It is an account of the entire history of China from mythical times through the establishment of the Han Dynasty in 206 BC. 10Source: britannica.com phy ima Qian, The Father of Chinese Hee the moet noted Chie historan for hia authorship ofthe Shit Historical Records"), ‘which is considered to be the most important history of China down to the end of the and century. 2. Greek Historiography. It originated in the activities of a group of writers whom the Greeks called logographoi (logographers). Logography was thé prose compilation of oral traditions relating to the origins of towns, peoples, and places. It combined geographical with cultural information and might be sees as an early form of cultural anthropology. Hecataeus of Miletus, the best known of the logographers defined his tasks in his Genealogia (490 B.C.). ‘The logographers also served as advocates and speech writers in the courts, and the need to ascertain facts and make arguments clearly influenced their writings. The logographers pioneered in the study of History. 3. Roman Historiography. The Romans inherited Greek historiography as they inherited other elements of Greek culture, aware of its prestige and emulating it in some ways but inevitably giving it the imprint of their quite different temperament. Fittingly, it was Greek writing in Greek, Polybius (200-118 B.C.) who first offered key insights into the development of the Roman state and discussed aspects of Roman society that the Romans themselves had hardly noticed. The primary reason for Rome's success according to him was the Roman character, as reflected in statesmanship, public spirit and moderation toward defeated peoples. 4, Islamic Historiography. The Quran, the sacred text of Islam, contains allusions that constitute the basis of a providential history of humankind from Adam through Muhammad, the founder of Islam. Another valuable resource of Islamic historians is the Hadith (the watraditions or sayings of Muhammad), which is, arranged in such a way that lines of transmission can be traced back to those who knew the prophet. Chains of authorities were thus integral to early Islamic theology and historiography, which naturally lent themselves to annalistic treatment. ORE: ‘The Golden Mosque of the Quiapo distriet Mosque is situated in the predominantly’ Muslim section The Marj A Dahal cr the olden Monte ja. This Moai bo the center of imi ith founded by Prophet Muhammad. History and Historians + ag Je A historian may refer to any person who is involved in the study of history ofa icular period social in the partic period of time or any other kind of phenomenon that has — a ar Historians are regarded as the authority in affairs related to history and they Ta ae many kinds of research activities of past events. In the late 19 bai e Pl aes became ished phet: , universities were historian e one of the establi profe pee ae sa esses ai research work. It is very important for a histor reat’all the. cross. Historians certain degree of objectivity and consider counter evidences that he comes a ing the world hold a significant and important position in'the society as they play the role of telling of truth. a : .d in the research of already established facts to ascertain ‘versatile and dynamic one Historians may also be involve j ‘ian is truth or provide other sources of information. The job of a histori 12as their work can provide many pieces of information that us hitherto unknown to the worly This collection of biographies with trivia, interesting facts, timeline and life history will provide detailed information on famous historians (TFP 2017). Qualities of an Ohjective Historian According to Schneider (2001), the qualities of an objective historian are: 1. Historian must treat sources with appropriate reservations. 2. Historian must not dismiss counter evidence without scholarly considerations. 3- Historian must be even-handed in her treatment of evidence, 4- Historian must clearly indicate any speculation. 5. Historian must not mistranslate documents or mislead by omitting parts of documents, ©. Historian must weigh the authenticity of all accounts, not merely those that contradict her favored view. 4, 7. Historian must take the motives of historical actors into consideration. Source: Biblioteca Virtual Early Filipino Historian Trinidad Pardo De Tavera also known by his name'T. H. Pardo de Tavera was a known Filipino historian. Tavera was known for his writings about different aspects of Philippine culture. 13Famous Early Historians at Pe hg be According to Vann (2017), some of the famous early historians in history are: 1, Herodotus. He was noted as the “Father of History”. Although the logographers pioneered in the Study of history, their influence was eclipsed by Herodotus. His history of Greco-Persian Wars (499-449 ‘B.C.), a series of conflicts between Persia and Greek city-states is the longest extant in ancient Greek. The fact that it has survived when so many other works written in ancient Greek were lost, including majority of the plays of the great tragedians like Sophocles and much of the corpus of Aristotle, is testimony to the great esteem in which it was held. Like the logographers, Herodotus’s approach was historical arid anthropological. He also that the Egyptian historical records went much further back that the Greek ones and the Egyptian customs were the reverse of those he knew. 2, Thucydides. The most famous critic and emulator of Herodotus was Thucydides which flourish 5% century B.C. Whereas Herodotus has hoped to preserved the glory of Greeks and barbarians from the destruction of time. Thiscydides had little glary to celebrate. In his great work, the History of the Peloponnesian War, which describes the destructive conflict (431-404 B.C.) between Athetis'and Sparta. He aimed “not to write dowa the first story that came my way, and not even to be guided by my own general impressions”. When reporting bn events that he did not personally witness, he carefully checked. the reports of “eyewitnesses, bearing in memories. Because of this he was sometimes called the “Father of Seientific History". 3. Livy. He is one of the greatest Roman historians, lived through the fall ofthe republic and the establishment of the principate by Augustus, the first Roman emperor. Livy was inclined to idealize the severe virtues of republican Rome. His monumental history, most of which has not survived; starts with the founding of the city and extends into the rule of Augustus. Livy’s work served to memorialize Rome's early history just as the republic was being formed into empire. 4. Tacitus. His great works are the Annals which covers the years 14-68 A.D, and the Histories which begins with the famous “year of the four emperors” (69 A.D.) and ends with the death of the emperor Domitian (96 A.D.) provide an important account, of'the first century, of the principate. Tacitus was a self-conscious stylist, and his treatise on style he claimed that styles were themselves the product of historical changes rather than being entirely the decision of th: historian, His own writing is perhaps most remarkable for his concise epigrams.5. Al-Tabari. He was known as the greatest early Islamic historian. Al-Tabari (839-923 A.D.) was reputed to have memorized the Quran at the age of seven. Legend credited him with producing a 30,000-page commentary on the Quran and an equally long universal history both survive but are only one-tenth as long. His chiefs virtues as a historian were his accurate chronology and his scrupulous faithfulness in reproducing authorities. Like Christians analysts, he depended on the Hebrew Bible as interpreted by Islam, though the world he inhabited was basically Egypt and Muslim Asia rather than Western Christendom. ipino Historians In the Philippines we have plenty of Filipino historians, some of them are: 1. Teodoro Agoncillo- He was one among the first Filipino historians renowned for promoting a distinctly nationalist, essayist and poetic point of view of Filipino history. He was named National Scientist of the Philippines in 1985 for his distinguished contributions in the field of history. - 2. Renato Constantino- He is known asa Filipino historian. Apart from being a historian, Constantino was also engaged in foreign service, working for the Philippine Mission to the United Nations and the Department of Foreign Affairs. Constantino. held professorial positions at the University of the Philippines and other prominent universities. 3. Gregorio F. Zaide- Zaide was a historian, author _and politician from the town of Pagsanjan, Laguna in the Philippines. A multi-awarded author, Zaide wrote 67 books and more than 500 articles abouthistory. He was one of the founders of the International Association of Historians of Asia. (AHA), and president of the Philippine Historical Association for three terms. “at 4 Trinidad Pardo de Tavera- He was a Filipino physician, historian and. politician of Spanish and Portuguese descent. Trinidad, also known by his nameT. H. Pardo de ‘Tavera was known for his writings about different aspects of Philippine culture. 5. Carmen Guerrero Nakpil- She is a Filipino journalist, author, historian and public servant. She was born in Ermita, Manila, into the Guerrero dan of that town, who were painters and poets, as well as scientists and doctors. Emergence of Historical Associations Many historical associations and societies were founded in the late 19'* and early 20% century by amateur historians whose interest in the past was often combined with a desire to 15celebrate the significance, growth, and. business potential of the comtunity, These early Societies were commonly formed by elites whose main interest was the history of people like themselves, leaders in business, commerce and government. Their mission was to preserve the legacy of their ancestors, to commemorate heroes, and to Preserve historic architecture. Rapid urbanization and urban renewal in the 20% century led to another wave of interest in preserving local history (Doyle’2012). Historical Associations ‘There are already thousands of historical associations and societies around the world that promotes history. Some of them are: 1. Royal Historical Society (RHistS).Founded on 1868 is the foremost society in the United Kingdom with professional historians and advancing the scholarly study of the past.The RHS represents history as a discipline and historians as a group. It promotes the vitality of historical scholarship through support for research and publication and ‘advocates best practice in history teaching in universities and schools. vr . American Historical Association (AHA). Professors, teachers, specialists and others interested in the advancement of history in the United States were gathered in 1884 to established the Aiterieaii Historical Association. The AHA has been at the forefront of movements to develop high standards in history education. 3. Association of Chinese Historians (ACH). Founded in Beijing, China in 1950, the Association of Chinese Historians is an academic group of Chinese historians. * Philippine Historical Association (PHA), A professional association of historians in the Philippines. It was founded 1955 by'a group. of prominent historians in Manila. PHA is affiliated with the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP), the National Commission of Culture and the Arts cncca) and the Philippine Social Science Council (PSSC). It is also a founding member of the International Association of Historians of Asia (IAHA) " a Philippine National Historical Society (PNHS). The PNHS is today the oldest voluntary professional organization devoted to ‘the stu study and research in history. It was Officially organized: in 1941when its constitution. and by-laws ‘were approved, with the organization initially called Philippine Historical Society. While: this” was’ the first organization of historians in the country there were other similar groups that actually 16preceded, like the Asociacion Historica De Filipinas and Sociedad Iistorico-Geografica De Filipinas. The National Historical Commission of the Philipp! The National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NCHP) is responsible for the 8. Its major thrusts encompass an ion of the historical legaci conversation and preserva ambitious cultural program on hi Philippine heraldry, historical information dissemination activit dissemination activities, and preservation of relics and memorabilia of heroes and other al studies, curatorial works, architectural conservation, es, restoration information renowned Filipinos. The NHCP undertakes the commemoration of significant events personages in Philippine history and safeguard in blazoning of the national government and its political divisions and instrumentalities. NHCP was known before as the National Historical Institute (NHI) which was established in 1972 during the time of former President Ferdinand Marcos. Tt was only in 2010 when former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed into law the Republic Act 10086 or “An Act Strengthening Peoples’ Nationalism Through Philippine History by Changing the Nomenclature of the National Historical Institute into the National Historical Commission of the Philippines, Strengthening its powers and Functions, and for Other Purposes.” Sot ‘The National Historical Commission of the Philippines 7The National Historical Commission of the Philippines or NHCP was created in 1972 initally as the National Uistorical Institute to integrate the diverse functions of various historical agencies. It is located in T-M. Kalaw St, Manila Composition of the Board of National Historical Commission of the Philippines ‘The NHCP is governed by a nine member Board headed by a Chairperson and composed of five distinguished historians who served as regular member appointed by the President of the Republic of the Philippines. The members of the board are 1, Director of the National Library of the Philippines 2, Director of the National Museum 3. Executive Director of the National Archives of the Philippines 4, Executive Director of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines. Mandates of National Historical Commission of the Philippines 1. Conduct and support all kind of research relating to Philippine national and local history. 2. Develop educational materials in various media, implement historical educational activities for the popularization of Philippine history, “and disseminate information regarding Philippine historical events, dates, places and personages. ; 3. Undertake and prescribe the manner of restorations, conservation and protection of the country’s historical movable and immovable objects. f 4. Manage, maintain and administer national shrines, momiments, historical sites, edifices and landmarks of significant historico-cultural value. 5. Actively engage in the settlement or resolution of controversies or issues relative to historical personages, places, dates and events. Divisions of National Historical Commission of the Philippines According to NCHP (2017), the following are the division of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines: an1. Historic Preservation. 2. Historic Sites and Education. 3. Research, Publications and Heraldry. 4. Materials Research Conservation. 5: Finance and Administrative Conclusion In conclusion, the study of the past is essential for ‘rooting’ people in time, The answer is that people who feel themselves to be rootless live rootless lives, often causing a lot of damage to themselves and others in thie process. Indeed, at the most extreme end of the out-of-history Spectrum, those individuals with the distressing experience of complete memory loss cannot manage on their own at all. In fact, all people have a full historical context. But’ some, generally for reasons that are no fault of their own, grow up with a weak or troubled sense of their own placing, whether within their families or within the wider world. They lack a sense of roots. For others, by Contrast, the inherited legacy may even be too powerful and outright oppressive. In all cases, understanding our History is integral to a good understanding of the condition of being human. That allows people to build, and, as may well be necessary, also to change, upon a secure foundation. Neither of these options can be undertaken well without understanding the context and starting points. All living people live in the here and now, but it took a long unfolding history to get everything to now, And that history is located in time-space, which holds this cosmos together, and which frames both the past and the present. So, understanding the linkages between Past and present is absolutely basic for a good understanding of the condition of being human. That, in a nutshell, is why History matters. Itis not just 'useful’, it is essential (Corfield 2018).