Readings in

Philippine history
SS1C
Introduction to History

• Why do people do the things we do?

• How can we explain human behavior?
• Under what circumstances do people take
certain actions, and in what
circumstances do they take surprising
actions?
• One can derive answers for these questions from an academic
discipline known as History. By examining past events of humans,
we can compare their situations to different periods and draw
conclusions as to what we can learn from these past events.
• Lessons learned from these past events can provide understanding
of present day phenomenon.
• We look at the past, but we do so to learn about people today. By
studying history, we are able to know and understand the story of
our nation, trace our roots and identity, find lessons from the past
that will address problems of today and be able to use these to
Etymology and Definition
• HISTORY came from the Greek word “Historie” or
“Historia” which means “learning, inquiry or
investigation”.
• It is a branch of the Social Sciences that deals with the
systematic study of significant past
• A branch of knowledge that records and explains past
events and which concerns people and human nature.
• Being a branch of the social sciences, History centers on the study of people
and the society. Which is why, the people are considered as the focal point in
the study of history.
• The definition emphasizes that it is a “systematic” study. This means that
history as a discipline follows a methodology in order to establish and be able
to validate facts and evidences.
• The definition mentions of “significant” past as the subject matter of history.
By “significant past” it entails that only past events which has affected the
political, cultural, social and economic aspects of the society or of the lives of
the people, are considered part of history.
• It does not follow that everything that happened in the past is considered part of
Philippine History
• For example, On June 14, 2001, Pedro threw a ball of paper in the trashcan. That is
a past event but cannot be considered as part of Philippine History.
• Consistently, the definition of history only covers those which are “recorded” or
“written” events.
• It is important to note, that “history” is a western concept which failed to account
unrecorded or unwritten sources of history like oral traditions in the case of the
Philippines.
• These issues regarding the western concept of “history” and our Filipino concept of
“kasaysayan” will be further tackled in our next module.
Historiography

• refers to the study of history itself

• 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.
Elements of History
• The HISTORIAN
• This refers to the person writing the history.
• PLACE
• The location where the history was written
• PERIOD
• Refers to the context of the time when the history was written.
• SOURCES
• Refers to the basis of claims or analysis of the historian such as
Nature of History as an Academic Discipline

• History has no subject matter of its own.

• Of course, the subject matter of history covers all the persons and
all events that have happened in the past. It is actually very broad
since it does cover everything that has happened in the society
including all aspects from political, economic social, culture etc.
• History synthesizes knowledge from other fields.
• Since it covers all phenomena, History as a branch of the Social
Sciences analyzes the relations of different events, their cause and
effects using also the knowledge used in other fields of the Social
Nature of History as an Academic Discipline
• History illuminates pieces of the past.
• History provides for explanations of things that happened in the past. By looking
at relationships of different events and phenomena, it provides explanations for
seemingly unexplainable gaps.
• History is constantly changing
• Since claims to historical facts are based on personal accounts, documents and
artifacts, a historian makes an analysis based only on available sources of data.
The historian cannot conclude something which is baseless. Unlike other Social
Sciences which can gather actual and real time data or conduct experiments to test
their hypothesis, historians have to rely on what is available. Therefore, when
new data are discovered, previous historical accounts can be changed.
Nature of History as an Academic Discipline

• History sheds light to truth.

• Since a historian constantly write about previous
phenomena using historical sources as basis, all claims
therefore supports only the truth base on the data
available. This however does not preclude the fact that a
historian uses also unwritten sources such as oral accounts
and traditions.
Importance of the Study of History
• The study of History 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. This being the case history will provide is
with a strong basis for providing answers for problems that pervades at present.
• According to E. Kent Rogers, we study History because of the following:
• First, “to know more about the roots of our current culture”. This being the case history will
provide us with the basis by which we can understand better different cultural institutions and
constructs. For example, why is it that in the modern-day Philippines a lot of Filipinos value
having white complexion when in fact we are naturally brown skinned? An analysis of our
historical background will of course reveal that because we have been colonized by white
complexioned people particularly the Spaniards and Americans, having white skin is viewed
as somewhat of higher status than the brown skinned;
Importance of the Study of History
• Second, “to learn about human nature by looking at trends that repeat
through history” and “learn about mistakes of those who have gone
before us”. History deals with analysis therefore, by studying different
trends that happened before this could provide us with a clear analysis
of causes of events that happened. If the result of the event is negative
then we could navigate another path to seek for a better state of affairs.
On the other hand, if the result of the events are positive then we can
recommend to repeat it to get the same result. Either way by
analyzing historical facts we can use the result in decision making or
future planning
History in Relation with other Social Sciences

• Archaeology
• Archaeology is scientific study of material remains of past
human life and activities as stated by Merriam and Webster.
Archaeologists usually excavates the earth in search of
artifacts. Through investigations of artifacts such as pottery,
weapons, jewelry etc, the historian can draw important
analysis and interpretation from them and make a description
of the lives and culture of the people that owned the artifacts.
• Anthropology
Sources of History
• Historians study the sources that the past has left behind. No statement about the
past can carry conviction unless it can be supported by reference to the historical
sources, the evidence upon which historians base their ideas and interpretations.
Historians inevitably spend a lot of time reading each other’s writings, but the
real historical work is done – and the real enjoyment is to be had – instudying the
sources, the actual ‘stuff’ of history. (University of Cambridge website)
• Historical evidences are important proof of the truthfulness of the past. In the
aim towards objectivity of the writing of history, these evidences become the
sources of historical data. “Sources”/ “Batis”/ “Sanggunian” refers to the basis of
claims or analysis of the historian. They serve as the evidences utilized in the
study of history.
Sources of History
• Primary and Secondary Sources. Primary and
secondary sources form the cornerstones of
historical research. A modern-day work of history
is essentially a description and interpretation of
primary sources, along with commentary of
secondary sources, both using them in reference to
the subject matter at hand, and agreeing and
disagreeing with them.
Sources of History
A. Primary Sources
• A primary source provides direct or firsthand evidence about an event, object,
person, or work of art. These are the evidences by eyewitnesses or created by people
who experienced the said event or phenomena. The historian’s responsibility is to
organize the primary sources into a coherent account to become secondary source.
• In effect, a primary source is direct source of historical information dating from the
period in question. A baptismal register of 1866 in the parish of Concepcion, Tarlac
would be a primary source about Spanish colonial period in Philippine History. A
Philippine coin minted in 1910 would be a primary source about the American
colonial period. A newspaper printed in 1943 would be a primary source from the
Japanese period..
Sources of History
• Primary sources include historical and legal documents, eyewitness
accounts, results of experiments, statistical data, pieces of creative writing,
audio and video recordings, speeches, and art objects. Interviews, surveys,
fieldwork, and Internet communications via email, blogs, and newsgroups
are also primary sources.
• In the natural and social sciences, primary sources are often empirical
studies—research where an experiment was performed or a direct
observation was made. The results of empirical studies are typically found
in scholarly articles or papers delivered at conferences.
Sources of History
B. Secondary Sources
• Secondary sources, on the other hand, are interpretations of history They
describe, discuss, interpret, comment upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and
process primary sources. These are the products of people or writers who were
not part of the event or phenomena.
• One can consider them as history books, although this is a bit misleading, as
secondary sources can include articles, movies, audio recordings, or any other
source of media that interprets history. Teodoro Agoncillo’s Malolos: The Crisis of
The Republic, though deals with the events of 1899 is a secondary source because
it interprets facts of the past; though dealing with the time-frame , it is not from
the period in question.
Sources of History
• Secondary source materials can be articles in
newspapers or popular magazines, book or movie
reviews, or articles found in scholarly journals that
discuss or evaluate someone else's original research.
Sources of History
C. Teritiary Resources
• Others cite another classification, the 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.
Types of Historical Sources
• Archival Material
• Manuscripts and archives are primary sources, including business and
personal correspondence, diaries and journals, legal and financial documents,
photographs, maps, architectural drawings, objects, oral histories, computer
tapes, and video and audio cassettes. Some archival materials are published
and available in print or online.
• Government Documents
• Government documents provide evidence of activities, functions, and policies
at all government levels. For research that relates to the workings of
government, government documents are primary sources.
• These documents include hearings and debates of legislative bodies; the
Types of Historical Sources
• Serials
• Journals, magazines, and newspapers are serial publications that are published on an
ongoing basis.
• Many scholarly journals in the sciences and social sciences include primary source
articles where the authors report on research they have undertaken. Consequently,
these papers may use the first person ("We observed…"). These articles usually
follow a standard format with sections like "Methods," "Results," and "Conclusion."
• Serials may also include book reviews, editorials, and review articles. Review articles
summarize research on a particular topic, but they do not present any new findings;
therefore, they are considered secondary sources. Their bibliographies, however, can
be used to identify primary sources.
Types of Historical Sources
• Books
• Most books are secondary sources, where authors reference primary source materials and add
their own analysis. “The First Filipino” by Leon Ma. Guerrero is a biography of Jose Rizal. If you
are researching Jose Rizal, this book would be a secondary source because the author is offering
his views about the hero. Books can also function as primary sources. For example, Jose Rizal’s
own letters and essays would be primary sources.
• Visual and Audio Materials
• Visual materials such as maps, photographs, prints, graphic arts, and original art forms can
provide insights into how people viewed and/or were viewed the world in which they existed.
• Films, videos, TV programs, and digital recordings can be primary sources. Documentaries,
feature films, and TV news broadcasts can provide insights into the fantasies, biases, political
attitudes, and material culture of the times in which they were created. Radio broadcast
recordings, oral histories, and the recorded music of a particular era can also serve as primary
source material
Historical Criticism
• The historian’s role in writing history, to reiterate, is to provide meanings
to facts that he gathered from primary sources (facts from manuscripts,
documents) or those that have been gathered by archaeologists or
anthropologists (artifacts). He can only make conclusions and
generalizations based on them. It is therefore his duty to check on the
authenticity of the sources that are presented to him to be used as basis in
writing history. Sources have to undergo doubting and therefore should be
critically tested for validity. There are two kinds of criticisms that a
historian can use in the process; these are External and Internal Criticisms
A. External Criticism
• The ‘External Criticism’ covers the physical examinations of sources like documents, manuscripts,
books, pamphlets, maps, inscriptions and monuments. In original documents it includes looking at
the paper and ink used whether or not it is within the same circa as the content of the work.
Oftentimes its more difficult to establish the authenticity of manuscripts and records rather than
document simply because the printed document have already been authenticated by the writer.
• Following are the elements that have to be taken into consideration in doing
validation:
1. Authorship. The name of the author of the document usually provides credence in the
establishment of validity of a certain document. The author’s name in itself can provided for the
test of authenticity. In cases of anonymous writings when the exact name of the author is not
known then the office that holds the record should also be taken into consideration. For example,
if we are studying population records and we use documents from civil registrar’s office then that
will lead to the consideration that the documents are authentic.
A. External Crticism
2. Date and place of publication
The date of the document including the time and place of publication should
be properly analyzed in order to establish its authenticity. Modern day
documents and publication have their date and place of publication usually
printed at the back of the title page. However, for manuscripts there are
usually no date and place of publications indicated. In such cases, the historian
should look for dates mentioned within the manuscript or cross check with
other records. Sometimes an analysis of the language used or the date of birth
and death of the author can also be used as basis for the establishment of its
true date.
A. External Criticism
3. Textual errors
The historian should always be in the lookout for errors in the text of documents and
manuscripts. There are two kinds of errors in documents unintentional or intentional.
Unintentional errors are mistakes that are caused by typist or scribes usually in spelling,
omitted words or phrases. Intentional error are often made when there is an effort to
modify or supplement existing records or original manuscript for personal intention or
interest of the record keeper or editor. In such cases, efforts should be made by the
historian to get the original document and compare or cross check with other related
records or documents.
Sometimes, the style of writing of the author can also be used to authenticate the
originality of the document. If the style of writing does not match the author’s style of
writing then the document is dubious.
A. External Criticism
4. Meanings of words used
The meaning of words used usually changes from generation to
generation, therefore the historian have to interpret the words used
based on the time when the document was made. Also, there are
instances when words mean differently in different places. In this case,
the historian have to take into consideration the place and culture when
the document was made. He must be very careful in understanding the
terms, if not any misinterpretation will lead to historical
misunderstandings.
B. Internal Criticism
• Positive criticism refers to understanding of both literal and real meaning of words. A
historian therefore must be able to analyze and interpret the contents of documents in their
real meaning. Document contains the idea of the person who wrote or made the evidences,
therefore they should be understood within that context. Historians should refrain from
making their own conclusions so as not to convey their own interpretation rather than the
true meaning of the content. One important characteristic that a historian should possess is
the capacity to doubt all documents and facts when these are not yet subjected to
authentication. The historian should question the motive of the writer and question the
accuracy of the document. Likewise, the historian should verify if the writer of the document
has a first had information or had experience the phenomena he wrote and how long the time
elapsed between the occurrence of the event and the time the document was written. In cases
of contradicting records, the historian should corroborate the facts from other claims or
documents. The truthfulness or veracity of the document should be established
C. Debunking “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The Code
of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism

• Jose Rizal’s “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata”

According to Dr. Nancy Kimuell Gabriel on her tesis masterado “Timawa: Kahulugan, Kasaysayan
at Kabuluhan sa Lipunang Pilipino,” on UP Diliman, 2001the poem shows falseness. Historian
Ambeth Ocampo,National artist of the Philippines and writer Virgilio S. Almario and others have
debunked Rizal's traditional authorship of the poem based on the following.
a.) AUTHORSHIP
No manuscript for Sa Aking Mga Kabatà written in Rizal's handwriting exists. The poem
supposedly wrote in 1869 where he was only 8 years old then.
A young revolutionary? Another questionable aspect of this poem is the precocious social
commentary of its alleged young author. The poem contains some very mature insights for an eight-
year-old boy – the “stinky fish” line notwithstanding. There are some bold statements that are just
as much about freedom and nationhood as they are about language.
The language is too precocious even for an eight-year-old prodigy like Jose Rizal
C. Debunking “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The
Code of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism
b.)DATE AND PLACE OF PUBLICATION
The poem was first published in 1906, a decade after his death, in a book
authored by the poet Hermenigildo Cruz.
Rizal had 35 years to publish or assert authorship. He did not. The poem
was published posthumously.
c. TEXTUAL ERRORS
In Rizal’s childhood they spelled words with a “c” rather than “k.” Further,
the word “kalayaan” (freedom) is used twice.(No manuscript EXIST)
C. Debunking “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The Code
of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism
d.)MEANINGS OF WORDS USED
Kalayaan was not a common word in 1869 and there is irrefutable evidence that Jose Rizal himself did not learn the
word until he was 25 years old. Rizal first encountered the word atleast by 1872 the years after the execution of
GOMBURZA.
The historian Zeus Salazar, however, refuted the claims of Andrade and Yanga in his essay Ang Kartilya ni Emilio
Jacinto in 1999. He maintained that the word laya and its various conjugations “were already a part of Tagalog
vocabulary at that time [and] therefore, could not have been invented by anybody.” However, he also wrote,
“Laya/calayaan was not yet needed in writing before 1864 and even later, especially since timawa/catimaoan was still
widely used back then as meaning ‘free/freedom.’” Evidently, Rizal had not encountered the word kalayaan until he
saw it in Marcelo H. del Pilar’s Pag-ibig sa Tinubuang Lupa [Love for the Native Land], which was his Tagalog
translation of Rizal’s own Spanish essay, Amor Patrio. Naturally, if Rizal didn’t know the word kalayaan when he was
25 years old, he could not have written a poem in which the word appears twice when he was only eight years old.
Whichever case is true, young Jose’s alleged use of the word kalayaan in 1869 is no less curious. Moreover, even if
kalayaan was a term known to some people in Bulakan, the fact that it did not appear in Florante at Laura, the poem
that Rizal consulted, is telling because it was written by the most famous poet of Bulakan, Francisco (Balagtas)
Baltazar. We know this because of a letter he wrote to his brother Paciano in 1886. Jose had written a Tagalog
translation of Friedrich Schiller’s German play Wilhelm Tell and he wanted Paciano to review it. He explained that he
found it difficult to translate some of the concepts in the play.
C. Debunking “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The
Code of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism
My Dear Brother,
There I’m sending you at last the translation of Wilhelm Tell by
Schiller… I lacked many words, for example, for the word Freiheit
or liberty. The Tagalog word kaligtasan cannot be used, because this
means that formerly he was in prison, slavery, etc. I found in the
translation of Amor Patrio the noun malayà, kalayahan that
Marcelo del Pilar uses. In the only Tagalog book I have – Florante –
I don’t find an equivalent noun.”
C. Debunking “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The Code
of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism
2. The Code of Kalantiaw
William Henry Scott, examined the pre-Hispanic history of the
Philippines. Scott raised issues on the existence of the Code of
Kalantiaw, specifically on:
• LACK OF HISTORICAL EVIDENCE
No written/ pictorial documents from that time in Philippine
history
No documents from other countries that mentions Kalantiaw
C. Debunking “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The Code
of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism
• LACK OF EVIDENCE FOR A KALANTIAW LEGEND
No recorded Filipino legend about Kalantiaw other than the
doubtful Pavon manuscripts before the 20th century
Historian Diego Alba looked for Kalantiaw in local folklore but
found none
• DOUBTFUL PAVON MANUSCRIPTS
Two inconsistent versions on how Jose Marco obtained the
manuscripts
( looters and cook stories)
Chapter Key Points
• History is a branch of the Social Sciences that deals with the systematic study of
SIGNIFICANT PAST, a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events
and which concerns people and human nature

• History has no subject matter of its own. It synthesizes knowledge from many
fields. It illuminates pieces of the past. It constantly changing. It is subjective and it
searches for the truth

• Historiography refers to the study of history itself. It 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.
Chapter Key Points
• The elements of history are: the historian, place, period and sources

• The focal point in the study of history are the people and its nature.
History being a branch of social science

• There are bountiful reasons why we have to learn history.

• Other fields of knowledge such as Archaeology, Anthropology,

Sociology, Economics, Politics are important in the study of history.
Chapter Key Points
• History being a discipline follows a methodology in order to establish
facts or evidences. Evidences in history are known as Sources. They
can be primary, secondary or tertiary.

• In order to validate these sources, they must undergo Historical

Criticism , first is external then internal.

• Jose Rizal’s poem “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and the alleged pre-
colonial written code “ The Code of Kalantiaw” were debunked
through historical criticism