Lesson 1

THE MEANING OF HISTORY

HISTORY is derived from the Greek word historia which means learning by inquiry.

The Greek philosopher, Aristotle, looked upon history as the systematic accounting of a
set of natural phenomena, that is, taking into consideration the chronological
arrangement of the account.

This explained that knowledge is derived through conducting a process of scientific

investigation of past events.

The word History is referred usually for accounts of phenomena, especially human
affairs in chronological order.

There are theories constructed by historians in investigating history: the factual history
and the speculative history.

 Factual history presents readers the plain and basic information vis-à-vis
( meaning: in relation to; with regard to or in a position facing a specified or
implied subject. ) the events that took place (what), the time and date with which
the events happened (when), the place with which the events took place, and the
people that were involved (who).

 Speculative history, on the other hand, goes beyond facts because it is

concerned about the reasons for which events happened (why), and the way they
happened (how). “It tries to speculate on the cause and effect of an event”
(Cantal, Cardinal, Espino & Galindo, 2014).

History deals with the study of past events. Individuals who write about history are
called historians.
- They seek to understand the present by examining what went before.
- They undertake arduous historical research to come up with a meaningful and
organized rebuilding of the past.

But whose past are we talking about? This is the basic question that the historian needs
to answer because this sets the purpose and framework of a historical account. Hence, a
salient feature of historical writing is the facility to give meaning and impact value to a
group of people about their past.

The practice of historical writing is called historiography, the traditional method

in doing historical research that focus on gathering of documents from different
libraries and archives to form a pool of evidence needed in making a descriptive or
analytical narrative.

The modern historical writing does not only include examination of documents but
also the use of research methods from related areas of study such as archeology and
geography.

THE LIMITATION OF HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE

The incompleteness of records has limited man's knowledge of history. Most human
affairs happen without leaving any evidence or records of any kind, no artifacts, or if
there are, no further evidence of the human setting in which to place surviving artifacts.

Although it may have happened, but the past has perished forever with only occasional
traces.

The whole history of the past (called history-as-actuality) can be known to a historian
only through the surviving records (history-as-record), and most of history as-record
is only a tiny part the whole phenomenon. Even the archaeological and anthropological
discoveries are only small parts discovered from the total past.
Historians study the records or evidences that survived the time. They tell history from
what they understood as a credible part of the record. However, their claims may remain
variable as there can be historical records that could be discovered, which may affirm or
refute those that they have already presented.

This explains the "incompleteness" of the "object" that historians study.

HISTORY AS THE SUBJECTIVE PROCESS OF RE-CREATION

From the incomplete evidence, historians strive to restore the total past of mankind.
They do it from the point of view that human beings live in different times and that their
experiences maybe somehow comparable, or that their experiences may have
significantly differed contingent on the place and time.

For the historian, history becomes only that part of the human past which can be
meaningfully reconstructed from the available records and from inferences regarding
their setting.

In short, the historian's aim is verisimilitude (the truth, authenticity, plausibility)

about a past. Unlike the study of the natural science that has objectively measurable
phenomena, the study of history is a subjective process as documents and
relics are scattered and do not together comprise the total object that the
historian is studying. Some of the natural scientists, such as geologists and paleo-
zoologists who study fossils from the traces of a perished past, greatly resemble
historians in this regard, but they differ at certain points since historians deal with
human testimonies as well as physical traces.

HISTORICAL METHOD AND HISTORIOGRAPHY

The process of critically examining and analyzing the records and survivals of the past is
called historical method.

The imaginative reconstruction of the past from the data derived by that process is
called historiography.

By means of historical method and historiography (both of which are frequently

grouped together simply as historical method), the historian endeavors to reconstruct as
much of the past of mankind as he/ she can.

Even in this limited effort, however, the historian is handicapped. He/She rarely can tell
the story even of a part of the past as it occurred. For the past conceived of as something
that "actually occurred" places obvious limits upon the kinds of record and of
imagination that the historian may use. These limits distinguish history from fiction,
poetry, drama, and fantasy.

Historical analysis is also an important element of historical method.

In historical analysis, historians:

(1) select the subject to investigate;
(2) collect probable sources of information on the subject;
(3) examine the sources genuineness, in part of in whole; and
(4) extract credible "particulars” from the sources (or parts of sources). The synthesis of
the “particulars" thus derived is historiography.

Synthesis and analysis cannot be entirely separated since they have a common ground,
which is the ability to understand the past through some meaningful, evocative and
convincing historical or cross-disciplinary connections between a given historical issue
and other historical contexts, periods, or themes.
LESSON 2
SOURCES OF HISTORICAL DATA

HISTORICAL DATA are sourced from artifacts that have been left by the past. These
artifacts can either be relics or remains, or the testimonies of witnesses to the past.

Thus, historical sources are those materials from which the historians construct
meaning.

To rearticulate, a source is an object from the past or a testimony concerning the past on
which historians depend to create their own depiction of that past.

A historical work or interpretation is thus the result of such depiction. The source
provides evidence about the existence of an event; and a historical interpretation is an
argument about the event.

Relics or “remains," whose existence offer researchers a clue about the past. For
example, the relics or remains of a prehistoric settlement.

Artifacts can be found where relics of human happenings can be found, for example, a
potsherd, a coin, a ruin, a manuscript, a book, a portrait, a stamp, a piece of wreckage, a
strand of hair, or other archaeological or anthropological remains.

These objects, however, are never the happenings or the events; if written documents,
they may be the results or the records of events. Whether artifacts or documents, they
are materials out of which history may be written (Howell and Prevenier, 2001).

Testimonies of witnesses, whether oral or written, may have been created to serve as
records or they might have been created for some other purposes.

All these describe an event, such as the record of a property exchange, speeches, and
commentaries.

The historian deals with the dynamic or genetic (the becoming) as well as the static
(the being) and aims at being interpretative (explaining why and how things
happened and were interrelated) 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 small parts of the periods to which they belong.

A historical context can be given to them only if they can be placed in a human setting.
The lives of human beings can be assumed from the retrieved artifacts, but without
further evidence the human contexts of these artifacts can never be recaptured with any
degree of certainty.

WRITTEN SOURCES OF HISTORY

Written sources are usually categorized in three ways:
(1) narrative or literary,
(2) diplomatic or juridical, and
(3) social documents.

1. Narrative or literature are chronicles or tracts presented in narrative form,

written to impart a message whose motives for their composition vary widely.

For example, a scientific tract is typically composed in order to inform contemporaries

or succeeding generations; a newspaper article might be intended to shape opinion; the
so-called ego document or personal narrative such as a diary or memoir
might be composed in order to persuade readers of the justice of the author's actions; a
novel or film might be made to entertain, to deliver a moral teaching, or to further a
religious cause; a biography might be written in praise of the subject's worth and
achievements (a panegyric, a public speech or published text in praise of someone
or something or hagiography, the writing of the lives of saints). A narrative source is
therefore broader than what is usually considered fiction(Howell & Prevenier, 2001).

2. Diplomatic sources are understood to be those which document/record an

existing legal situation or create a new one, and it is these kinds of sources that
professional historians once treated as the purest, the "best" source.

The classic diplomatic source is the charter, which a legal instrument. A legal
document is usually sealed or authenticated to provide evidence that a legal
transaction has been completed and can be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding in
case of dispute.

Scholars differentiate those legal instruments issued by public authorities (such as kings
or popes, the Supreme Court of the Philippines and Philippine Congress) from those
involving only private parties (such as a will or a mortgage agreement).

Diplomatic sources possess specific formal properties, such as hand and print style,
the ink, the seal, for external properties and rhetorical devices and images
for internal properties, which are determined by the norms of laws and by tradition.
Such characters also vary in time (each generation has its own norms) and according to
origin (each bureaucracy has its own traditions).

3. Social documents are information pertaining to economic, social, political, or

nificance. They are records kept by bureaucracies.
A few examples are government reports, such as municipal accounts, research findings,
and documents like these parliamentary procedures, civil registry records, property
registers, and records of census.

NON-WRITTEN SOURCES OF HISTORY

Unwritten sources are as essential as written sources.

They are two types:

1. the material evidence
2. oral evidence.

1. Material evidence, also known as archaeological evidence is one of the most

important unwritten evidences.

This include artistic creations such as pottery, jewelry, dwellings, graves, churches,
roads, and others that tell a story about the past.

These artifacts can tell a great deal about the ways of life of people in the past, and their
culture.

These artifacts can also reveal a great deal about the socio-cultural interconnections of
the different groups of people especially when an object is unearthed in more one place.

Commercial exchange may also be revealed by the presence of artifacts in different

places. Even places that are thought to be insignificant, such as garbage pits, can provide
valuable information to historians as these can be traces of a former settlement.

Sometimes, archaeological sites that are of interest to historians are unearthed during
excavations for roads, sewer lines, and big building structures. Known historical sites
are purposely excavated with the hope of reconstructing and understanding their
meaningful past.

Moreover, archaeological finds such as coins or monies can provide historians with
significant information relating to government transactions during which the currencies
were in circulation.

Similarly, historians can get substantial information from drawings, etchings, paintings,
films, and photographs. These are the visual representations of the past.
2. Oral evidence is also an important source of information for historians. Much
are told by the tales or sagas of ancient peoples and the folk songs or popular
rituals from the premodern period of Philippine history. During the present age,
interviews is another major form of oral evidence.

PRIMARY VERSUS SECONDARY SOURCES

There are two general kinds of historical sources: direct or primary and indirect or
secondary.

1. Primary sources are original, first-hand account of an event or period that are
usually written or made during or close to the event or period.

These sources are original and factual, not interpretive.

Their key function is to provide facts.

Examples of primary sources are diaries, journals, letters, newspaper and magazine
articles (factual accounts), government records (census, marriage, military),
photographs, maps, postcards, posters, recorded or transcribed speeches, interviews
with participants or witnesses, interviews with people who lived during a certain time,
songs, plays, novels, stories, paintings, drawings, and sculptures.

2. Secondary sources, on the other hand, are materials made by people long after
the events being described had taken place to provide valuable interpretations of
historical events. A secondary source analyzes and interprets primary sources. It
is an interpretation of second-hand account of a historical event.

Examples of secondary sources are biographies, histories, literary criticism, books

written by a third party about a historical event, art and theater reviews, newspaper
or journal articles that interpret.

LESSON 3- HISTORICAL CRITICISMS

HISTORICAL CRITICISM examines the origins of earliest text to appreciate the

underlying circumstances upon which the text came to be (Soulen & Soulen, 2001).

It has two important goals:

First, to discover the original meaning of the text in its primitive or historical context
and its literal sense or sensus literalis historicus.

Second, to establish a reconstruction of the historical situation of the author and

recipients of the text.

Historical criticism has two types:

1. external criticism
2. internal criticism.

Historical criticism has its roots in the 17th century during the Protestant Reformation
and gained popular recognition in the 19th and 20th centuries (Ebeling, 1963).

The absence of historical investigation paved the way for historical criticism to rest on
philosophical and theological interpretation.

The passing of time has advanced historical criticism into various methodologies used
today such as source criticism (which analyzes and studies the sources used by
biblical authors), form criticism (which seeks to determine a unit's original form and
historical context of the literary tradition), redaction criticism (which regards the
author of the text as editor of the source materials), tradition criticism (which
attempts to trace the developmental stages of the oral tradition from its historical
emergence to its literary presentation), canonical criticism (which focuses its
interpretation of the bible on the text of biblical canon), and related methodologies
(Soulen, 2001).

There are two parts to a historical criticism.

1. The first part is to determine the authenticity of the material, also called
provenance of a source. The critic should determine the origin of the
material, its author, and the sources of information used.

External criticism is used in determining these facts.

The second part is to weigh the testimony to the truth.

The critic must examine the trustworthiness of the testimonies as well as determine the
probability of the statements to be true. This process is called internal criticism or
higher criticism since it deals with more important matters than the external form.

1. External criticism determines the authenticity of the source. The

authenticity of the material may be tested in two ways, by palaeographical (the
deciphering and dating of historical manuscripts) and diplomatic criticism
(critical analysis of historical document to understand how the document came to
be, the information transmitted, and the relationships between the facts
purported in the document and the reality).

The material must be investigated based on the time and place it is written. The critic
must determine whether the material under investigation is raw, meaning unaltered,
and it exists exactly as the author left it.

The content must be viewed in every possible angle, as forgery was not unknown during
the Middle Ages.

The authenticity of the material can be examined from other genuine sources having the
same subject or written during the same period. The similarities or agreements and
differences or disagreements of some common details, such as the culture and
traditions, and events during the period by which the document was made can be a basis
for judging the authenticity of the text.

2. Internal criticism determines the historicity of the facts contained in the

document.

It is not necessary to prove the authenticity of the material or document. However, the
facts contained in the document must first be tested before any conclusion pertaining to
it can be admitted.

In determining the value of the facts, the character of the sources, the knowledge of the
author, and the influences prevalent at the time of writing must be carefully
investigated.

It must be ascertained first that the critic knows exactly what the author said and that
he/she understands the document from the standpoint of the author.

Moreover, the facts given by the author or writer must be firmly established as having
taken place exactly as reported.

TEST OF AUTHENTICITY
To distinguish a hoax or a misrepresentation from a genuine document, the historian
must use tests common in police and legal detection.

Making the best guess of the date of the document, he/she examines the materials to see
whether they are not anachronistic: paper was rare in Europe before the fifteenth
century, and printing was unknown; pencils did not exist there before the 16th century;
typewriting was not invented until the 19th century; and Indian paper came only at the
end of that century. The historian also examines the inks for signs of age or of
anachronistic chemical composition.

Making the best guess of the possible author of the document, he/she sees if he/ she can
identify the handwriting, signature, seal, letterhead, or watermark.

Even when the handwriting is unfamiliar, it can be compared with authenticated

specimens.

One of the unfulfilled needs of the historian is more of what the French call
"isographies" or the dictionaries of biography giving examples of handwriting.

For some period of history, experts using techniques known as paleography and
diplomatics have long known that in certain regions at certain times handwriting and
the style and form of official documents were conventionalized.

The disciplines of paleography and diplomatics were founded in 17th century by Dom
Jean Mabillon, a French Benedictine monk and scholar of the Congregation of Saint
Maur.

Seals have been the subject of special study by sigillographers, and experts can detect
fake ones.

Anachronistic styles (idiom, orthography, or punctuation) can be detected by specialists

who are familiar with contemporary writing.

Often spelling particularly of proper names and signatures, reveal forgery as would also
unhistoric grammar.

Anachronistic references to events (too early or too late or too remote) or the dating of a
document at a time when the alleged writer could not possibly have been at the place
designated (the alibi) uncovers fraud. Sometimes the skillful forger has all too carefully
followed the best historical sources and his product becomes too obviously a copy in
certain passages; by skillful paraphrase and invention, he/she is given away by the
absence of trivia and otherwise unknown details from his/her manufactured account.
However, usually if the document is where it ought to be (e.g., in a family's archives, of
in the governmental bureau's record) its provenance (custody, as the lawyers refer to it),
creates a presumption of its genuineness (Gottschalk, 1969).
THE FIRST VOYAGE AROUND THE WORLD BY MAGELLAN BY ANTONIO
PIGAFETTA
This book was taken from the chronicles of contemporary voyagers and navigators of the
sixteenth century.

One of the them was Italian nobleman Antonio Pigafetta, who accompanied Ferdinand
Magellan in his fateful circumnavigation of the world.

- Pigafetta’s work instantly became a classic that prominent literary men in the west

Like William Shakespear, Michel de Montaigne, Giambattista Vico referred to the book
in their interpretation of the new world.

A brief summary of the first voyage around the world by Magellan by Antonio Pigafetta

- Pigafetta’s travelogue is one most important primary sources in the study of the
precolonial Philippines.
- His account was also a major referent to the events leading to Magellan’s arrival in the
Philippines, his death in the hands of Lapu Lapu’s forces in the Battle of Mactan, and in
the departure of what was left of Magellan’s fleet from the
Islands.

- document reveals several insights not just in the character of the Philippines during
the precolonial period, but also on how the fresh eyes of the Europeans regard a deeply
unfamiliar terrain, environment, people, and culture.
- locating Pigafetta’s account in the context of its writing warrants a familiarity on
- The dominant frame of mind in the age of exploration, which pervaded Europe in the
fifteenth and sixteenth century.
- students of history need realize that primary sources used in the subsequent written
Histories depart from certain perspectives. - we need to know
- thus, Pigafetta’s account was also written from the perspective of Pigafetta himself
And was a product of the context of its production.
- the first voyage around the world by Magellan was published after Pigafetta returned
to Italy.
- for this chapter, we will focus on the some chronicles of antonio pigafetta as he
Wrote his firsthand observation and general impression of the far east including their
Experiences in the visayas. In figafetta’s accoount, their fleet reached what he called
The landrones island or the “islands of the thieves.”
- the landrones islands is presently known as the marianas islands. These islands are
Located south-southeast of japan, west southwest of hawaii. North of new guinea,
And east of the philippines.
- here, he met two kings. The first king was raja siagu, and the other king was raja
Calambu, king of zuluan and calagan (butuan and caragua).
- one day, magellan ordered the chaplain to preside a mass by the shore.
- the two kings heard ot this plan and sent two dead pigs and attended the mass.
- after the mass, magellan ordered that the cross be brought with nails and crown in
Place.
- the king concurred and allowed for the cross to be planted.
- this mass would go down in history as the first mass in the philippines, and the cross
Would be the famed magellan’s cross still preserved at the present day.

- magellan also reached the island of cebu where he met and, as a sign of friendship.
Made a blood compact with raja humabon, the king of cebu.
- a principal man from the island of matan (mactan) by the name zula want to see
Magellan and asked him to fight the chief named silapulapu (lapulapu).
- magellan agreed and expressed to go to mactan himself to fight the said chief.
- outnumbered, 49 to 1,500, magellan died in that battle.
Analysis of pigafetta’s chronicle
- the chronicle of pigafetta was one of the most cited documents by historians who
Wished to study the precolonial philippines.
- moreover, being the earliest detailde documentation, it was believed that pigafetta’s
Writings account for the “purest” precolonial society.
- nevertheless, there needs to have a more nuanced reading of the source within a
Contextual backdrop.
- a student of history should recognize certain biases accompanying the author and his
Identity, loyalties, and the circumstances that he was in: and how it affected the text
That he produced.
- in reading pigafetta’s description of the people, one has to keep in mind that he was
Coming from a sixteenth century european perspective.
- it should be understood that such observations were rooted from the context of
Pigafetta and of his era.
- these contexts should be used and understood in order to have a more qualified
Reading of pigafetta’s account.
THE KKK AND THE “ KARTILYA NG KATIPUNAN “

• The Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (KKK) is

arguably the most important organization formed in the Philippine history.

* It was only Katipunan that envisioned:

1. A united Filipino nation that would revolt against the Spaniards for
2. The total independent of the country from Spain.
3.
Previous armed had already occurred before the foundation of the Katipunan, but none
of them envisioned a unified Filipino nation revolting againts the colonizers:

1. For example, Diego Silang was known as an Ilocano who took up his arms and led of
the longest running revolts in the country. Silang, however , he was mainly concerned
About his locality and referred to himself as El Rey de Ilocos ( The King of Ilocos ).

The propaganda movement led by the Illustrados like Marcelo H, del Pilar, Graciano
Lopez Jaena, and Jose Rizal did not envision a total separation of the Philippines from
Spain, but only demanded equal rights, representation, and protection from the abuses
of the friars.

• In the conduct of their struggle, Katipunan created a complex structure and a defined
value system that would guide the organization as a collective aspiring for a single goal.

• One of the most important Katipunan documents was the Kartilya ng Katipunan.
• The original title of the document was ‘Manga aral nang katipunan ng mga anak ng
Bayan.” Or “Lessons of the organization of sons of country.”

• The document was written by Emilio Jacinto in the 1896.

• Jacinto was only 18 years old when he joined the movement.

• He was a law student at the Unibersidad de Santo Tomas.

• Jacinto became the secretary of the organization and took charge of the short-lived
printing press of the Katipunan.
• On 15 April 1897, Bonifacio appointed Jacinto as a commander of the Katipunan in
Northern Luzon. Jacinto was 22 years old.

• He died of malaria at a young age of 24 in the town of Magdalena, Laguna.

• The Kartilya can be treated as the Katipunan’s code of conduct. It contains fourteen
rules that instruct the way a Katipunero should behave, and which specific values should
be uphold.

Generally, the rules stated in the Kartilya can be classified into two:

1. The first group contains the rules that will make the member an upright individual.
2. The second group contains group contains the rules that will guide the way he treats
his fellow men.

• Kartilya ng Katipunan ni Emilio Jacinto:

1. Ang kabuhayang hindi ginuggugol sa isang malaki at banal na kadahilanan ay kahoy

na walang lilim, kundi damong makamandag.

2. Ang gawang magaling na nagbubuhat sa pagpipita sa sarili, at hindi talagang nasang

gumawa ng kagalingan, ay di kabaitan.

3. Ang tunay na kabanalan ay ang pagkakawang gawa, at pagibig sa kapwa at ang isukat.
Ang bawat kilos, gawa’t pangungusap sa talagang katuiran.
4. Maitim man at maputi ang balat , lahat ng tao’y’ magkakapantay: mangyayaring ang
isa’y higtan sa dunong, sa yaman, sa ganda..., ngunit di mahihigtan sa pagkatao.

5. Ang may mataas na kalooban inuuna ang pagpipita sa sarili sa puri.

6. Sa tong may hiya, salita’y panunumpa.

7. Huwag mong sayangin ang panahun: ang yamang nawala’y mangyayaring magbalik;
ngunit panahung nagdaan na’y di na muli pang magdadaan.
8. Ipagtanggol mo ang inaapi: kabakan ang umaapi.

9. Ang taong matalino’y ang may pagiingat sa bawat sasabihin, at matulong ipaglihim.
Ang dapat ipaglihim.

10. Sa daang matinik ng kabuhayan, lalaki ay siyang patugot ng asawa’t mga anak: kung
ang umaakay ay tungo sa sama, ang pagtutunguhan ng inaakay ay kasamaan din.

11. Ang babae ay huwag mong tignang isang bagay na libangan lamng; gamitin mo ng
boong pagpipitagan ang kaniyang kahinaan, at alalahanin ang inang pinagbuhatan at
nagiwi sa iyong kasanggulan.

12. Ang di mo ibig na gawin sa asawa mo, anak at kapatid, ay huag mong gagawin sa
asawa, anak at kapatid ng iba.

13. Ang kamahalan ng tao’y wala sa pagkahari, wala sa tangus ng ilong at puti ng mukha,
wala sa pagkaparing kahalili ng dios, wala sa mataas na kalagayan sa balat ng lupa:
Wagas at tunay na mahal na tao, kahit laking gubat at walang nababatid kun di ang
Sariling wika, yaon may magandang asal, may isang pangungusap, may dangal at puri;
Yaon di nagpapaapi’t di nakikiapi; yaong marunong magdamdam at marunong
Lumingap sa bayang tinubuan.

14. Paglagalap ng mga aral na ito at maniningil na sumikat ang araw ng mahal na
kalayaan dito sa kaabaabang sangkapuluan, at sabungan ng matamis niyang liwanag
ang nangagkaisang magkakalahi’t magkakapatid na ligayang walang katapusan , ang
mga ginuguol na buhay, pagud, at mga tiniis na kahirapa’y labis nang natumbasan.

Analysis of the “Kartilya ng Katipunan”

• as the primary governing document which determines the rules of conduct in the
Katipunan, properly understanding the Kartilya will thus help in understanding the
values, ideals, aspirations, and even the ideology of the organization.

• similar to what we have done to the analyzed in terms of content and context:

1. As a document written for a fraternity whose main purpose is to overthrow a

Colonial regime, we can explain the content and provisions of the kartilya as a reaction
and response to certain value systems that they found despicable in the
Present state of things that they struggled against with.

2. Moreover, one can analyze the values upheld in the document as consistent with the
burgeoning rational and liberal ideals in the eighteenth and nineteenth century.

3. In the contemporary eyes, the Katipunan can be criticized because of these provisions.
However, one must not forget the context where the organization was born.

4. Aside from this, the Kartilya was instructive not just of the Katipunan’s conduct
toward other people, but also for the member’s development as individuals in their own
rights.

• All in all, proper reading of the Kartilya will reveal a more through understanding of
the Katipunan and the significant role that it played in the revolution and in the
Unfolding of the Philippines history, as we know it.

• This manifests in the selectiveness of information that can found in these records.
• It is the task of the historian, thus, to analyze the content of these documents in
relation to the dominant politics and the contexts of people and institutions surrounding
it.

• This tell us a lesson on taking primary sources like official government records within
the circumstances of this production.

• Studying one historical subject, thus, entails looking at multiple primary sources and
pieces of historical evidences in order to have a more nuanced and contextual analysis of
our past.

Chapter 2 - Content And Contextual Analysis Of Selected Primary Sources

In Philippine History
Alfred Mccoy’s Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature Of The America Era
(1900-1941)

Our primary source nagpapaaralan ay ang Alfred McCoy’s Philippine cartoons:

political caricature of the america era

 Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered away
from the classical art by exaggerating human features and poking fun at its
subjects.
 Such art genre and technique became a part of the print media as a form of social
and political commentary, which usually targets persons of power authority.
 Cartoons became an effective tool of the publicizing opinions through heavy use
of symbolism, which is different from a verbose written editorial and opinion
pieces.
 The unique way that a caricature represents opinion and captures the audience’s
imagination is reason enough for historians to examine these political cartoons.

- It’s easy to get an attention

• commentaries in mass media inevitably shape public

Opinion and such kind of opinion is worthy of historical examination.

In his book Philippine cartoons: political caricature of the American era ( 1909-1941),
Alfred McCoy, together with Alfredo Roces, compiled political cartoons published in
newspaper dailies and periodicals in the aforementioned time period. For this part, we
are going to look at selected cartoons and explain the context of each one.

The understanding of politics and society in a certain period of time can be known
and understood not only through texts but also through cartoons or caricatures. A
political caricature is a type of drawing that is used to present a comment, opinion, or
criticism on a particular event, person, and situation. It is also known as editorial
cartoon found in a newspaper.

In this part of the chapter are five (5) political cartoons to be analyzed. These are derived
from the book entitled Philippine cartoons: political caricatures of the American era,
1900-1941, edited by Alfred W. McCoy and Alfredo R. Roces (copyright 1985).
The first example shown above was published in The Independent on May 20, 1916. The
cartoon shows a politician from Tondo, named Dr. Santos, passing his crown to his
brother-in-law, Dr. Barcelona. A Filipino guy (as depicted wearing salakot and barong
tagalog) was trying to stop Santos, telling the latter to stop giving Barcelona the crown
because it is not his to begin with.

The second cartoon was also published by the The Independent on 16 June, 1917. This
was drawn by Fernando Amorsolo and was aimed as a commentary to the workings of
manila police at that period. A man wearing a salakot labeled Juan dela Cruz was
grabbing the officer, telling him to leave the small-time pickpockets and turn to at the
great thieves instead.

The third cartoon was a commentary on the unprecedented cases of colorum

automobiles in the city streets. The Philippine free press published this commentary
when fatal accidents involving colorum vehicles and taxis occured too often already.
The fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up police officer was at the screen saying
that couples are not allowed to neck and make love in the theater. Two youngers looked
horrified while an older couple seemed amused.

The next cartoon was published by the The Independent on 27 November 1915. Here, we
see the caricature of Uncle Sam riding a chariot pulled by Filipinos wearing school
uniforms. Mccoy, in his caption to the said cartoon, say that this cartoon was based on
an event in 1907 when William Howard Taft was brought to the manila pier riding a
chariot pulled by students of liceo de manila.

The last cartoon was published by Lipang Kalabaw on 24, August 1907. In the picture,
we can see Uncle Sam rationing porridge to the politicians and members of the
Progresista Party (sometimes known as the Federalista Party) while members of the
Naccionalista Party look on and wait for their turn. This cartoon depicts the patronage
of the united states being coveted by politicians from either of the party.

 The transition from the Spanish colonial period to the American occupation
period demonstrated different strands of changes.
 The selected cartoons illustrate not only the opinion of certain media outfits
about the Philippine society during the American period but also paint a broad
image of society and politics under the united states.

 The transition from a catholic-centered, Spanish-Filipino society to an imperial

American-assimilated one, and its complications, were also depicted in the
cartoons.
 Lastly, the cartoons also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the
Philippines now governed by the united states. From the looks of it, nothing
much has changed.
Reading the “PROCLAMATION OF THE PHILIPPINES”

• Every year, the country commemorates the anniversary of the Philippine

independence proclaimed on 12 June 1898, in the province of Cavite.

• Indeed, such event is a significant turning point in the history of the country because it
signaled the end of the 333 years of Spanish Colonization.

• The declaration was a short 2,000-word document, which summarized the reason
Behind the revolution against Spain, the war for independence, and the future of the
new republic under Emilio Aguinaldo.
• highlights of the proclamation speech include:

1. A characterization of the conditions in the Philippines during the Spanish colonial

period. The document specifically mentioned abuses and inequalities in the colony.

2. A brief historical overview of the Spanish occupation since Magellan’s arrival in

Visaya’s until the Philippine revolution, with specific details about the latter,
Especially after the pact of Biak-na-Bato had collapsed.

3. The mention of Rizal’s execution, calling it unjust.

4. The Cavite mutiny of 1872 that caused the infamous execution of the martyred native
Priest Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora, “whose innocent blood was
shed through the intrigues of those so-called religious orders” that cited the three
secular priest in the said mutiny.

5. The established republic would be led under the dictatorship of Emilio Aguinaldo.

6. Its explanation on the Philippine flag that was first wave on the same day.
Analysis of the “Proclamation of the Philippine Independence”

• as mentioned earlier. A re-examination of the document on the declaration of

independence can reveal some often overlooked historical truths about this important
event in Philippine history.

1. The document reflects the general revolutionary sentiment of that period.

2. The proclamation also gives us impression on how the victorious revolutionary

government of the Aguinaldo historicized the struggle for independence.

3. There were mentions of past events that were seen as important turning points of the
movement against Spain.

4. However, the Katipunan as the pioneer of the revolutionary movement was only
Mentioned once toward the end of the document. There was no mention of the
Katipunan’s foundation. Bonifacio and his co-founders were also left out. The enmity
between Aguinaldo’s Magdalo and Bonifacio’s Magdiwang in the Katipunan is no secret
in the pages of our history.

5. The point is, even official records and documents like proclamation of independence,
while truthful most of the time, still exude the politics and biases of whoever is in power.

• This manifests in the selectiveness of information that can found in these records.

• It is the task of the historian, thus, to analyze the content of these documents in
relation to the dominant politics and the contexts of people and institutions surrounding
it.

• This tell us a lesson on taking primary sources like official government records within
the circumstances of this production.
• Studying one historical subject, thus, entails looking at multiple primary sources and
pieces of historical evidences in order to have a more nuanced and contextual analysis of
our past.

REVISITING CORAZON AQUINO’S SPEECH BEFORE THE US CONGRESS

• Corazon “Cory” Coquangco Aquino funtioned as the symbol of the restoration of

democracy and the overthrow of the Marcos dictatorship.

In 1986 the EDSA people power, which installed Cory Aquino in the presidency, out the
Philippines in the international spotlight for overthrowing a dictator through peaceful
means.

• On 18 September 1986, seven months since Cory became president, she went
To the united states and spoke before the joint session of the US Congress.

Cory was welcomed with long applause as she took the podium addressed the united
states about her presidency and the challenges face by the new republic.

• Cory Aquino’s speech was an important event in the political and diplomatic history of
the country because it has arguably cemented the
Legitimacy of the EDSA government in the international arena.
• The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also be seen in
the same speech.

• Cory also hoisted herself as the reconciliatory agent after more than two decades of a
polarizing authoritarian politics.

• Despite Cory’s efforts to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her
Speech still revealed certain parallelisms between her and the Marcos
Government.
• reading through Aquino’s speech, we can already take cues, not just on Cory’s
individual ideas and aspirations, but also the guiding principles and framework of the
government that she represented.
READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY
a. Some Comments about History

“History not just a catalogue of events put in the right order like a railway timetable."
- A.J.P. Taylor

“Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it."
- George Santayana

“History is written by the winners."

-Napoléon Bonaparte

"To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child."
- Marcus Tullius Cicero

"If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf
that doesn't know it is part of a tree."
-Michael Crichton

"The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own
understanding of their history."
-George Orwell

"Study the past if you would define the future."

-Confucius
"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles."
-Karl Marx

“History is a wheel, for the nature of man is fundamentally unchanging. What has
happened before will perforce happen again."
-George R.R. Martin

"Let us study things that are no more. It is necessary to understand them, if only to
avoid them."
-Victor Hugo

"He who cannot draw on three thousand years is living from hand to mouth."
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

“History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we
are the way we are."
-David McCullough

“A generation which ignores history has no past – and no future." - Robert A.

Heinlein

“The lack of a sense of history is the damnation of the modern world."

-Robert Penn Warren
"If we are to make progress, we must not repeat history but make new history. We
must add to inheritance left by our ancestors."
-Mahatma Gandhi

"A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree
without roots."
-Marcus Garvey

"History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."

--Winston S. Churchill

"We are not makers of history. We are made by history."

-Martin Luther King, Jr.

b. Why Study History?

"He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the
past." - George Orwell, 1984

History-both knowledge of the past and the practice of researching and making sense
of what happened in the past - is crucially important to the welfare of individuals,
communities, and the future of our nation. According to processhistory.org, the study of
history is essential for the following reasons:

To Ourselves

Identity - "History nurtures personal identity in an intercultural world. History enables

people to discover their own place in the stories of their families, communities, and
nation."

Critical Skills - "History teaches critical 21st century skills and independent thinking.
The practice of history teaches research, judgment of the accuracy and reliability of
sources, validation of facts, awareness of multiple perspectives and biases, analysis of
conflicting evidence, sequencing to discern causes, synthesis to present a coherent
interpretation, clear and persuasive written and oral communication, and other skills."
(Process History, 2015)
To Our Communities

Vital Places to Live and Work - "History lays the groundwork for strong, resilient
communities. No place really becomes a community until it is wrapped in human
memory: family stories, tribal traditions, civic commemorations."

Economic Development - "History is a catalyst for economic growth. People are

drawn to communities that have preserved a strong sense of historical identity and
character." (Process History, 2015)

To Our Future

Engaged Citizens - "History helps people craft better solutions. At the heart of
democracy is the practice of individuals coming together to express views and take
action.

Leadership - "History inspires local and global leaders. History provides leaders with
inspiration and role models for meeting the complex challenges that face our
communities, nation, and the world."

Legacy - "History, saved and preserved, is the foundation for future generations.
History is crucial to preserving democracy for the future by explaining our shared past.
(Process History, 2015)

c. History Differentiated

1. History vs. Past

The past is not the same as history. The past involves everything that ever happened
since the dawn of time - every thought and action of man or woman on earth, every leaf
that fell in the tree, and every chemical change in this universe and others.

History, by contrast, is a process of interpreting evidence or records from the past in a

thoughtful and informed way. History is the narrative that gives meaning, sense, and
explanation to the past in the present.

2. History vs. Prehistory

History and prehistory show differences between them in their nature and substance.
The main difference between history and prehistory is the existence of records. History
is the record of significant events that happened in the past whereas prehistory is the
period of human activity prior to the invention of writing systems.

3. History vs. The Other Disciplines

No discipline is an island. In the past hundred years or so, the ways that we study, write,
and teach history have changed dramatically, often because of influence from other
disciplines. Where does history stand today in its relationship with its close relatives in
the social science and humanities? Do other disciplines use historical methodology?
Does this alone make them historians?

4. History, Historicity, and Historiography

In a nutshell, history is a narrative account used to examine and analyze past events.

Historicity is the authentication of characters in history, as opposed to legend or myth.

Historiography is the writing of history, and the understanding of how the

interpretations of historians change over time. But what is the difference among history,
historicity, and historiography? Are they compatible enterprises? And if compatible,
how dependent are they among each other?
5. History vs. Herstory

The word "history" (from Greek iotopia, historia, meaning "inquiry, knowledge
acquired by investigation") is etymologically unrelated to the possessive pronoun his.
Traditionally, history has been defined as "the study of the past as it is described in
written documents." Feminists argued that it has been men (“his," "story") who usually
have been the ones to record the written past.

Herstory, by contrast, is history written from a feminist perspective, emphasizing the

role of women, or told from a woman's point of view. It is a neologism coined as a pun
with the word "history," as part of a feminist critique of conventional historiography
which in their opinion is traditionally written as "his story," i.e., from the masculine
point of view. What about women? Should an event in the past that was written down be
called "herstory?" ("History," 2018; "Herstory," 2018)

2. Defining Historical Research

Historical research “comprises the techniques and guidelines by which historians use
primary sources and other evidence, including the evidence of archaeology, to research
and then to write histories in the form of accounts of the past." ("Historical method -
Wikipedia," 2017)

The historical approach "is employed by researchers who are interested in reporting
events and/or conditions that occurred in the past. An attempt is made to establish facts
in order to arrive at conclusions concerning past events or predict future events." (Key,
1997)

Examples of Historical Research

1. From Chalkboard to Whiteboard: A Historical Study of Teaching Instruction 2. A

study of the effects of the historical decisions of the Philippine Supreme

Court on Philippine prisons 3. A study of the evolution of print journalism in the

Philippines PAGE 6

through a study
of collections of newspapers (BCPS, 2010)

a. The purposes of Historical Research

The main purpose of Historical Research is to describe and examine events of the past
to understand the present and anticipate potential future effects.

The purpose of historical research is to reach insights or conclusions about past persons
or occurrences. Historical research entails more than simply compiling and presenting
factual information; it also requires interpretation of the information. (“Historical
Research Methods," n.d.)

Educational researchers conduct historical studies for a variety of reasons, but perhaps
the most frequently cited is to help people learn from past failures and successes.

When well-designed and carefully executed, historical research can lead to the
confirmation or rejection of relational hypotheses. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

Typically, histories focus on particular individuals, social issues and links between the
old and the new. Some historical researches are aimed at reinterpreting prior historical
works by revising existing understandings and replacing them with new, often politically
charged ones. ("Historical Research Methods," n.d.)

Histories are powerful because they both create and reinforce collective identities.
Without a history it is difficult to know who one is, where one comes from or where one
is headed. It is difficult to belong or have direction. History is like a collective memory,
which historians produce about the past (Marwick, 2001). Having a history is important
because what happened in the past profoundly affects all aspects of our lives and will
affect what happens in the future. (Bryant et al., 2013, p. 4)

b. Characteristics of Historical Research

1. The unique characteristic of historical research is that it focuses exclusively on the

past. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

2. Historical research is not a mere accumulation of facts and data or even a portrayal of
past events. It is a flowing, vibrant report of past events which involves an analysis and
explanation of these occurrences with the objective of recapturing the nuances,
personalities and ideas that influenced these events.

3. Conducting historical research involves the process of collecting and reading the
research material collected and writing the manuscript from the data collected. The
researcher often goes back-and-forth between collecting, reading, and writing. i.e. the
process of data collection and analysis are done simultaneously are not two distinct
phases of research.

4. It deals with discovery of data that already exists and does not involve creation of data
using structured tools.

5. It is analytical in that it uses logical induction. 6. It has a variety of foci such as issues,
events, movements and concepts.

7. It records and evaluates the accomplishments of individuals, agencies or institutions.

(University of Calicut, n.d.)

C. Advantages and Disadvantages of Historical Research Advantages

1. The main advantage of historical research is that is permits the investigation of topics
that could be studied in no other way. It is the only research method that can study
evidence from the past. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

2. The historical method is well suited for trend analysis.

3. The research is not physically involved in the situation under study.

4. No danger of experimenter-subject interaction.

5. Documents are located by the researcher, data is gathered, and conclusions are drawn
out of sight.

Disadvantages

1. A disadvantage is that controlling for many of the threats to internal validity is not
possible in historical research. Many of the threats to internal validity are likely to exist
in historical studies. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d.)

2. The researcher cannot control for threats to internal validity

3. Limitations are imposed due to the content analysis 4. Researchers cannot ensure
representation of the sample. 5. There is bias in interpreting historical sources. 6.
Interpreting sources is very time consuming. 7. Availability of sources of historical
materials may be problematic 8. There is lack of control over external variables

d. Steps in Historical Research

There are four essential steps involved in doing a historical study. These include:
1. Identifying a topic/subject and defining the problem or hypothesis to be investigated;
2. Searching for sources of data and other relevant source materials;
3. Summarizing and evaluating the sources the researcher is able to locate; 4. Analyzing,
synthesizing and interpreting the evidence obtained and then drawing conclusions
about the problem or hypothesis.

Since most historical studies are largely qualitative in nature, the search for sources of
data, evaluating, analyzing, synthesizing and summarizing information and interpreting
the findings may not always be discreet, separate, sequential steps i.e. the sequence of
steps in historical research is flexible. (Fraenkel & Wallen, n.d; University of Calicut,
n.d.)

3. Theories of History
Even among historians, philosophers, thinkers and social scientists, there are

different views on how history develops or progresses. Here are some of these views:

a. Cyclical View of History

A cyclical view of history stems from the histories of the Greeks. The Greeks thought
that events recurred on a regular basis.

Herodutus' (484-424 BCE) work Histories, is the story of men and states as recurring
cycles.

Thucydides (460-404 BC) envisioned time as recurring in a cyclical fashion, a process

in which men were unable to control.

Petrach (1304-1374) revived the cyclical concept of history in the fourteenth century.
He differed slightly from the Greeks in suggesting the basis of history was the actions of
people rather than the whims of the gods.

Machiavelli (1469-1527) also saw history as being cyclical and suggested that history
could be seen as a casebook of political strategy.

Arnold Toynbee (1884-1975) and Oswald Spengler (1880-1936), based their work on
the premise that history is cyclical: civilizations rise and fall, each new one rising to a
greater level.

b. Linear View of History

The linear view of history implies the acceptance or subscription to linear time. It views
that history is progressive, moving forward and not having a cyclical return.

Augustine (350-430 BCE) saw history as being the unfolding of the plan of God, a
process that would end in the Final Judgement.

Voltaire (1694-1788) saw history as being linear, but in a more secular way. He
envisioned four great ages of man culminating in the scientific enlightenment of
Newton. Marxist historians also subscribe to a linear view of history, in the sense that
they

see history as a series of class struggles that inevitably ends in a workers' revolution.
H.G. Wells (1866-1946) described history as a race between education and

disaster, either as world cataclysm or a world state.

c. The Great God View of History

The most primitive attempts to explain the origin and development of the world and
man are the creation myths to be found among preliterate peoples. We are best
acquainted with the one in Genesis which ascribes the making of heaven and earth with
all its features and creatures to a Lord God who worked on a six-day schedule. These
fanciful stories do not have any scientific validity.

Just as the royal despots dominated the city states and their empires, so the will,
passions, plans and needs of the gods were the ultimate causes of events. The king is the
agent who maintains the world in being by means of an annual contest with the powers
of chaos. This theological theory was elaborated by the Sumerians, Babylonians and
Egyptians before it came down to the Greeks and Romans. It was expounded in the
Israelite scriptures whence it was taken over and reshaped by the Christian and
Mohammedan religions and their states. (Novack, n.d.)

d. Great Man View of History

The "Great Man" theory suggests that dominant personalities determine the course of
history. Rulers, warriors, statesmen, are the decisive forces in history and history is the
record of the deeds of great people.

The Great Man view has had numerous incarnations according to the values attached at
different times by different people to the various domains of social activity. In antiquity,
these ranged from the divine monarch, the tyrant, the lawgiver (Solon), the military
conqueror (Alexander), the dictator (Caesar), the hero-emancipator (David), and the
religious leader (Christ, Buddha, Mohammed). All these were put in the place of the
Almighty as the prime mover and shaper of human history. (Novack, n.d.)

Thomas Carlyle's (1795-1881) "everyman" view of history is one which sees history as
being a record of the collective experience of the ordinary person. "Universal history, the
history of what man has accomplished in this world, is at bottom the history of the great
men who have worked here."

Sir Walter Scott's (1771-1832) novels showed how people lived through significant
events and he advanced the idea that history was the story of ordinary people's lives.

William E.B. Du Bois (1868-1963) in his histories, Black Reconstruction in America,

Crisis, and The Souls of Black Folk, rejected the idea of history as the record of Western
European events and advanced a view of history as the record of the lives of subject
peoples.

e. The Best People View of History

This view believes that some elite, the Best Race, the favored nation, the ruling class
alone make history.

The Old Testament assumed that the Israelites were God's chosen people.

The Greeks regarded themselves as the acme of culture, better in all respects than the
barbarians. Plato and Aristotle looked upon the slave-holding aristocracy as naturally
superior to the lower orders. (Novack, n.d.).

Hitler thought that the Arian race was the best among races.

f. Ideas or the Great Mind View of History

This view of history is one in which the driving force in history is people's ideas. The
conditions that create history are created or changed by ideas.

The Greek Anaxagoras said: "Reason (Nous) governs the world."

Aristotle held that the prime mover of the universe and the ultimate animator of
everything within it was God, who was defined as pure mind engaged in thinking about
itself.
G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831) view history as the continual refinement of intellectual
understanding. The progress of mankind consisted in the working out and
consummation of an idea. He wrote: "Spirit, or Mind, is the only motive principle of
history." The underlying goal of the World Spirit and the outcome of its laborious
development was the realization of the idea of freedom.

Some 18th century rationalists believed that "opinion governs mankind." They
looked toward an enlightened monarch to introduce the necessary progressive
reconstruction of the state and society.

G. The Human Nature View of History

This view believes that history, in the last analysis, has been determined by the qualities
of human nature, good or bad. Human nature, like nature itself, was regarded as rigid
and unchanging from one generation to another. The historian's task was to
demonstrate what these invariant traits of the human constitution and character were,
how the course of history exemplified them, and how the social structure was molded or
had to be remodeled in accordance with them. (Novack, n.d.)

Thucydides, believed that "human nature and human behavior were-essentially fixed
qualities, the same in one century as another."

David Hume asserts that “Mankind are so much the same, in all times and places, that
history informs us of nothing new or strange in this particular. Its chief use is only to
discover the constant and universal principles of human nature."

E.B. Tylor wrote in 1889: "Human institutions, like stratified rocks, succeed each other
in series substantially uniform over the globe, independent of what seems the
comparatively superficial differences of race and language, but shaped by similar human
nature."

h. Economic View of History

The economic view sees economic factors as the most important determinant of history.
The production and exchange of goods and services is the bases of all social structures
and processes. The economic factor is the foundation for the superstructure of culture
and government.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) is the foremost proponent of this view. He disagreed with
Hegel by saying that it was not ideas that created material conditions, but rather the
reverse.

i. Gender History

Gender history looks at the past from the perspective of gender. It considers in what
ways historical events and periodization impact women differently from men.

Joan Kelly questioned whether the notion of a Renaissance was relevant to women in a
seminal article in 1977, "Did Women have a Renaissance?"

Gender historians are interested in how gender difference has been perceived and
configured at different times and places, usually with the assumption that such
differences are socially constructed.

In the 80s, with the rise of the feminist movement, the focus shifted to uncovering
women' oppression and discrimination. Nowadays, gender history is more about
charting female agency and recognizing female achievements in several fields that were
usually dominated by men (Wikipedia, 2018)

j. Post-modern View of History

The Postmodern view of history differs dramatically from that of all other worldviews.
While a Christian worldview sees history as the grand unfolding of God's divine plan to
redeem a fallen humanity, the radical Postmodernist on the other hand sees no ultimate
purpose in history.

Postmodernists view history as "what we make of it." They believe that historical facts
are inaccessible, leaving the historian to his or her imagination and ideological bent to
reconstruct what happened in the past. They use the term historicism to describe the
view that all questions must be settled within the cultural and social context in which
they are raised.

Both Jacques Lacan (1901-1981) and Michel Foucault (1926-1984) argue that
each historical period has its own knowledge system and individuals are unavoidably
entangled within these systems. Answers to life's questions cannot be found by
appealing to some external truth, but only to the norms and forms within each culture
that phrase the question.

Most Postmodernists doubt that an accurate telling of the past is possible because they
blur the difference between fact and fiction-some even claim that all historical accounts
are fiction. Foucault is one of the originators of this Postmodern approach to history,
which offers a profound challenge to the norm. (All About Worldview, n.d.)

k. Other Views of History

There are a number of other theories that attempt to explain history. Some historians
suggest that history is the result of geographic factors, and others suggest that wars
determine history. Still others suggest that religion, race, or climate determines the
course of history.

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) saw history as having no beginning or end, just

chaos that could only be understood by the powers of the mind.

Michel Foucault (1926-1984) posited that the victors of a social struggle use their
political dominance to suppress a defeated adversary's version of historical events in
favor of their own propaganda, which may go so far as historical revisionism, as in the
cases of Nazism and Stalinism. ("Philosophy of History - By Branch / Doctrine - The
Basics of Philosophy," n.d.)