CHAPTER I

Introduction to History: Definitions, Issues, Sources, and Methodology

Learning Objectives:
• Appreciate the importance of history in the social and national life of the Philippines.
• Examine and assess critically the value of historical evidences and sources.
Reference: Alporha, J. & Candelaria, V. (2018). Readings in Philippine History. Quezon City: Rex Printing Company, Inc.

Lesson 4: 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. Primary sources are those
sources produced at the same time as the studied event or subject being studied. For example, if a historian
wishes to study Commonwealth Constitution Convention of 1935, his primary sources can include the minutes
of the convention, newspaper clippings, Philippine Commission reports of the U.S. Commissioners, records of
the convention, the draft of the Constitution, and even photographs of the event. Eyewitness accounts of
convention delegates and their memoirs can also be used as primary sources. The same goes with other subjects
of historical study. Archival documents, artifacts, memorabilia, letters, census, and government records, among
others are the most common examples of primary sources.
On the other hand, 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: 1he 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
his work in 1956, which makes the Revolt of the Masses 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.
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.
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 a0e age in centuries. Externals criticism is the practice of verifying the authenticity of
evidence by examining its physical characteristics; consistency with the historical characteristic of the time when
it was produced; and the materials used for the evidence. Examples of the things that will be examined when
conducting external criticism of a document include the quality of the paper, the type of the ink, and the language
and words used in the material, among others.
Internal criticism, on the other hand, is the examination of the truthfulness of the evidence. It looks at the content
of the source and examines the circumstance of its production. Internal criticism 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, among others. 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 highly 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
ot evidence to prove that the code existed in the precolonial Philippine society. Ferdinand Marcos also claimed
that he was a decorated World War Il 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.

Philippine historiography underwent several changes since the precolonial period until the present. Ancient
Filipinos narrated their history through communal songs and epics that they passed orally from a generation to
another. When the Spaniards came, their chroniclers started recording their observations through written accounts.
The perspective of historical writing and inquiry also shifted. The Spanish colonizers narrated the history of their
colony in a bipartite view. They saw the age before colonization as a dark period in the history of the islands, until
they brought light through Western thought and Christianity. Early nationalists refuted this perspective and argued
the tripartite view. They saw the precolonial society as a luminous age that ended with darkness when the
colonizers captured their freedom. They believed that the light would come again once the colonizers were evicted
from the Philippines. Filipino historian Zeus Salazar introduced the new 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.