Definition and Subject Matter History has always been known as the study of the past. Students of general education often dreaded the subject for its notoriety in requiring. students to memorize dates, places, names, and events from distant eras. ‘This low appreciation of the discipline may be rooted from the shallow not wrong, it does not gi importance to human ci History was derived from the Greek word historia which means knowledge acquired through inquiry or investigation, History as a discipline: existed for around 2,400 years and is as old as mathematics and philosophy. ‘This term was then adapted to classical Latin where it acquired a new definition. Historia became known as the account of the past of a person or of a group of people through written documents and historical evidences. That meaning stuck until the early parts of the 20th century. History became an important academic discipline. It became the historian’s duty to write about the lives of important individuals like monarchs, heroes, saints, and nobilities. History was also focused on writing about wars, revolutions, and other important breakthroughs. It is thus important to ask: What counts as history? Traditional historians lived with the mantra of “no document, no history." It means that, unless a written document can prove a certain historical event, then it cannot be considered as a historical fact. Butas any other academic discipiines, history progressed and opened up, to the possibility of valid historical sources which were not limited to written documents like government records, chroniclers’ accounts, or personal letters. Giving premium to written documents essentially invalidates the hi of other civilizations who do not keep written records. Some are keener om passing their history by word of mouth. Others got their historical documents, burned or destroyed in the events of war or colonization. Restricting historical evidence as exclusively written is also discrimination of other social classes. who are not recorded in paper. Nobilities, monarchs, the elite, and even’ the middle class would have their birth, education, marriage, and death matters of government and historical record. But what of peasant famili or indigenous groups who do not give much thought about being registe1 to government records? Does the absence of written documents about t! mean that they are people of no history or past? Have they even existed? is Reading in Phippine HistoryThis loophole was recognized by historians who started using other Kinds of historical sources, which may not be in written format but were just as valid, A few of these examples are oral traditions in forms of epics and congs, artifacts, architecture, and memory. History thus became more inclusive and started collaborating with other disciplines as its auxiliary disciplines. With the aid of archaeologists, historians can use artifacts from a bygone era to study ancient civilizations who were formerly ignored in history because of lack of documents. Linguists ean also be helpful in tracing historical evolutions, past connections among different groups, and flow of cultural influence by studying language and the changes that it has undergone to, Even scientists like biologists and biochemists can help with the study of the past through analyzing genetic and DNA patterns of human societies. Questions and Issues in History Indeod, history as a discipline has already turned into a complex and dynamic inquiry. This dynamism inevitably produced various perspectives on the discipline regarding different questions like: What is history? Why study history? And history for whom? These questions can be answered by historiography. In simple terms, historiography is the history of history. History and historiography should not be confused with one another. The former's object of study is the past, the events that happened in the past, and the causes of such events. The latter's object of study, on the other hand, is history itself (i.e., How was @ certain historical text written? Who wrote it? What was the context of its publication? What particular historical method was employed” What were the sources used”), and so on, and so forth. Thus, historiography lets the students to have a better understanding of history. ‘They do not only get to learn historical facts, they are also provided with the understanding of the facts’ and the historian’s contexts. The methods ‘employed by the historian and the theory and perspective whieh guided him will also be analyzed. Historiography is important for anyone who studies history because it teaches the student to be critical in the lessons of history presented to him. History has played various roles in the past. States use history to unite a nation. It can be used as a tool to legitimize regimes and forge a sense of collective identity through collective memory. Lessons from the past ean be used to make sense of the present. Learning of past mistakes can help people to not repeat it. Being reminded of a great past can inspire people to keep their good practices to move forward. ‘Chaper1|introdecto to History: Definition sues Sources. und Nethodology 3As a narrative, any history that has been taught and written is always intended for a certain group of audience. When the ilustrados, like Jose Rizal, Isabelo de los Reyes, and Pedro Paterno wrote history, they intended it for the Spaniards so that they will realize that Filipinos are people of their own intellect and culture. When American historians depicted the Filipino people as uncivilized in their publications, they intended that narrative for their fellow Americans to justify their colonization of the islands, They wanted the colonization to appear not as a means of undermining the Philippines’ sovereignty, but as a civilizing mission to fulfill what they call as the “white man’s burden.” The same is true for nations who prescribe official versions of their history like North Korea, the Nazi Germany during the war period, and Thailand. The same was attempted by Marcos in the Philippines during the 1970s. One of the problems being confronted by history is the accusation that the history is always written by victors. This connotes that the narrative of the past is always written from the bias of the powerful and more dominant player. For instance, the history of the Second World War in the Philippines will always depict the United States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army as oppressors. Filipinos who collaborated with the Japanese were lumped in the category of traitors or collaborators. However, a more thorough historical investigation will reveal a more nuanced account of the history of that period instead of a simplified narrative as a story of hero versus villain, History and the Historian Ifhistory is written with agenda or is heavily influenced by the historian, is it then possible to come up with an absolute historical truth? Is history an objective discipline? If it is not, is it still worthwhile to study history? These questions have haunted historians for many generations. Indeed, an exact and accurate account of the past is impossible for the very simple reason that we cannot go back to the past. We cannot access the past directly as our subject matter. Historians only get to access representation of the past through historical sources and evidences, ‘Therefore, itis the historian’s job not just to seek historical evidences and facts but also to interpret these facts. “Facts cannot speak for themselves.” It is the job of the historian to give meaning to these facts and organize ‘them into a timeline, establish causes, and write history. Meanwhile, the historian is not a blank paper who mechanically interprets and analyzes present historical fact. He is a person of his own who is influenced by his own 4 Readings in Piipine Historycontext, environment, ideology, education, and influences, among others, In that sense, his interpretation of the historical fact is affected by his context and circumstances. His subjectivity will inevitably influence the process of his historical research: the methodology that he will use, the facts that he shall select and deem relevant, his interpretation, and even the form of his writings. Thus, in one way or another, history is always subjective. If that is 80, ean history still be considered as an academic and scientific inquiry? Historical research requires rigor. Despite the fact that historians cannot ascertain absolute objectivity, the study of history remains scientific because of the rigor of research and mothodology that historians employ. Historical methodology is comprised of certain techniques and rules that historians follow in order to properly sources and historical evidences in writing history. Certain rules apply in cases of conflicting accounts in different sources, and on how to properly treat eyewitness accounts and oral sources as valid historical evidence. In doing so, historical claims done by historians and the arguments that they forward in their historical writings, chile may be influenced by the historian’s inclinations, can still be validated by using reliable evidences and employing correct and meticulous historical methodology, For example, if a historian chooses to use an oral account as his data in studying the ethnic history of the Ifugaos in the Cordilleras during the American Occupation, he needs to validate the claims of his informant through comparing and corroborating it with written sources, Therefore, while bias is inevitable, the historian can balance this out by relying to evidences that back up his claim. In this sense, the historian need not let his bias blind his judgment and such bias is only acceptable if he maintained his rigor as a researcher. 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 hetween primary and secondary sources. ‘The classification of sources betweeri these two categories depends on the historical subject being studied. Primary sources are those sources produced at the same time as the event, period, or subject being studied. For example, if a historian wishes to study the Commonwealth Constitution Convention of 1936, his primary sources can include the minutes of the convention, newspaper Clippings, Philippine Commission reports of the US Commissioners, records of the convention, the draft of the Constitution, and even photographs of the event. Eyewitness accounts of convention delegates and their memoirs (Chapter | letredection wo Mitr: Deiat, lanes, Sources, nd Methodology 5ean also be UseU ws pruuasy suue: - 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 sourees 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 subje&. For example, on the subject of the Philippine Revolution of 1896, students can read Teodoro Agoncillo's Revolt of the Masees: The Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan published originally in 1956. Philippine Revolution happened in the last years of the 19th century: while Agoncillo published his work in 1956, which makes the Revolt of the: ‘Masses a secondary source. More than this, in writing the book, Agoncillo, used primary sources with his research like documents of the Katipui interview with the veterans of the revolution, and correspondence between and among Katipuneros. However, a student should not be confused about what counts as primary or a secondary source. As mentioned above, the classification sources between primary and secondary depends not on the period wh the sourre was produced or the type of the source but on the subject tho historical research. For example, a textbook is usually classified as secondary source, a tertiary source even. However, this classification is us but not automatic. If a historian chooses to write the history of education i the 1980s, he can utilize textbooks used in that period as a primary so Ifa historian wishes to study the historiography of the Filipino-Ameris War for example, he can use works of different authors on the topic as primary source as well. Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and I history. However, historians and students of history need to thoroug scrutinize these historical sources to avoid deception and to come up wit the historical truth. The historian should be able to conduct an external internal eriticism of the source, especially primary sources which can in centuries, External criticism is the practice of verifying the authentici of evidence by examining its physical characteristics; consistency with # historical characteristic of the time when it was produced; and the materi used for the evidence, Example of the things that will be examined wi conducting external criticism of a document include the quality of the pay the type of the ink, and the language and words used in the material, others. 6 Reedings in Philpine History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 souree; 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, historieal deceptions and lies will be highly probable. One of the most. seandalous 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 pre-calonial document until 1968, when American historian William Henry Scott debunked the authenticity of the code due to anachronism and lack of evidence to prove that the code existed in the pre-eolonial Philippine society, Ferdinand Marcos also claimed that he was a decorated World War 11 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! 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 longastime 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. Chapter | Introduction o History: Definition, les, Soates, ard Methdclogy ?