GE 112

Republic of the Philippines

ASIAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION COLLEGE
Tacloban City
A.Y. 2021 – 2022

READINGS IN
PHILIPPINE HISTORY
MODULE 1

The following are some reminders in using this module:

1. Please read and understand the lessons in this module.
2. Read the instruction carefully before answering the activity.
3. Observe honesty and integrity in doing the tasks.
4. Submit the activity to your teacher on the deadline.
5. If you encounter any difficulty in answering the activity in this module, do
not hesitate to consult your teacher. Always bear in mind that you are
not alone.
We hope that through this material, you will experience meaningful learning and
gain deep understanding of the relevant competencies.
YOU CAN DO IT!

Prepared by:
Desiree L. Donila, LPT
INSTRUCTOR
CHAPTER 1: Introduction to history: definition, issues, sources, and
methodology

Learning Objectives:
 To understand the meaning of history as an academic discipline and to be
familiar with the underlying philosophy and methodology of the discipline.
 To apply the knowledge in historical methodology and philosophy in assessing
and analyzing existing historical narratives.
 To examine and assess critically the value of historical evidences and sources,
 To appreciate the importance of history in the social and national life of the
Philippines.

This chapter introduces history as a discipline and as a narrative. It

presents the definition of the history, which transcends the common definition of
history as the study of the past. This chapter also discusses several issues in
history that consequently opens up for the theoretical aspects of the discipline.
The distinction between primary and secondary sources is also discussed in
relation to the historical subject matter being studied and the historical
methodology employed by the historian. Ultimately, this chapter also tackles the
task of the historian as the arbiter of facts and evidences in making his
interpretation and forming historical narrative.

Definition and Subject Matter

History has always been known as the study of the past. Students of
general education often dread the subject tor its notoriety in requiring them to
memorize dates, places, names, and events from distant eras. This low
appreciation of the discipline may be rooted from the shallow understanding of
history's relevance to their lives and to their respective contexts. While the
popular definition of history as the study of the past is not wrong, it does not give
justice to the complexity of the subject and its importance to human civilization.
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 twentieth 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. But as any other academic disciplines, 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 history of other
civilizations that do not keep written records. Some were keener on passing their
history by word of mouth. Others got their historical documents burned or
destroyed in the even war or colonization. Restricting historical evidence as
exclusively written is also discrimination against other social classes who were
not recorded in paper. Nobilities, monarchs, the elite, and even the middle class
would have their birth, education, marriage, and death as matters of government
and historical record. But what of peasant families or indigenous groups who
were not given much thought about being registered to government records?
Does the absence of written documents about them mean that they were people
of no history or past? Did they even exist?

This loophole was recognized by historians who started using other kinds
of historical sources, which may not be in written form but were just as valid. A
few of these examples are oral traditions in forms of epics and songs, 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 that were formerly ignored in history because of lack of documents.
Linguists can 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. 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

Indeed, 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 each other. The former's object of study 1s 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 a 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?).
Thus, historiography lets the students have a better understanding of history.
They do not only get to learn historical facts, but 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, which guided him, will also be
analyzed. Historiography is important for someone who studies history because it
teaches the student to be critical in the lessons of history presented to him.

History has played various roles n 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 can be used
to make sense of the present. Learning of past mistakes can help people to not
repeat them. Being reminded of a great past can inspire people to keep their
good practices to move forward.

Positivism also entails an objective means of arriving at a conclusion. In

the discipline of history, the mantra "no document, no history stems from this very
same truth, where historians were required to show written primary documents in
order to write a particular historical narrative. Positivist historians are also
expected to be objective and impartial not just in their arguments but also on their
conduct of historical research.

As a narrative, any history that has been taught and written 1s 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 would 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 fulfil what they called as the "white
man's burden." The same is true for nations which 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.

Postcolonialism is a school of thought that emerged in the early

twentieth century when formerly colonized nations grappled with the idea of
creating their identities and understanding their societies against the shadows of
their colonial past. Postcolonial history looks at two things in writing history: first
is to tell the history of their nat10n that will highlight their identity free from that of
colonial discourse d knowledge, and second is to criticize the methods, effects,
and idea of colonialism. Postcolonial history is therefore a reaction and an
alternative to the colonial history that colonial powers created and taught to the
Subjects.

One of the problems confronted by history is the accusation that the

history 1s always written by victors. This connotes that the narrative of the past is
always written from the bias of the powerful and the more dominant player. For
instance, the history of the Second World War in the Philippines always depicts
the United States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army as the
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 lf history is written with agenda or is heavily

infuenced by the historian, 1s it 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, it is the historians 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 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 so, can 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 methodology that historians employ Historical methodology comprises
certain techniques and rules that historians follow in order to properly utilize
sources and historical evidences in writing history. Certain rules apply in cases of
conflicting accounts in sources as valid historical evidence. In doing so, historical
claims done by historians and the arguments that they forward in their historical
writings, while may be influenced by the historian's inclinations, can still be
validated by using reliable evidences and employing correct and meticulous
historical methodology.

The Annales School of History is a school of history born in France that

challenged the canons of history. This school of thought did away with the
common historical subjects that were almost always related to the conduct of
states and monarchs. Annales scholars ike Lucien Febvre, Marc Bloch, Fernand
Braudel, and Jacques Le Goff studied other Subjects in a historical manner. They
were concerned with social history and studied longer historical periods. For
example, Annales scholars studied the history of peasantry, the history of
medicine, or even the history of environment. The history from below was
pioneered by the same scholars. They advocated that the people and classes
who were not reflected in the history of the society in the grand manner be
provided with space in the records of mankind. | In doing this, Annales thinkers
married history with other disciplines like geography, anthropology, archaeology,
and linguistics.

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 maintains 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 classified
between primary and secondary sources. The classification of sources
between these two categories depends on the historical subject being studied.
Primary sources are those sources produced at the same time as the event,
period, or subject being studied. For example, if a historian wishes to study the
Commonwealth Constitution Convention of 1935, his primary sources can
include the minutes of the convention, newspaper clippings, Philippine
Commission reports of the U.S. Commissioners, records of the convention, the
draft of the Constitution, and even photographs of the event. Eyewitness
accounts of convention delegates and their memoirs can also be used as primary
sources. The same goes with other subjects of historical study. Archival
documents, artifacts, memorabilia, letters, census, and government records,
among others are the most common examples of primary sources.

On the other hand, secondary sources are those sources, which were
produced by an author who used primary sources to produce the material. In
other words, secondary sources are historical sources, which studied a certain
historical subject. For example, on the subject of the Philippine Revolution of
1896, students can read Teodoro Agoncillo's Revolt of the Masses: The Story of
Bonifacio and the Katipunan published originally in 1956. The Philippine
Revolution happened in the last years of the nineteenth century while Agoncillo
published his work in 1956, which makes the Revolt of the Masses a secondary
source. More than this, in writing the book, Agoncillo used primary sources with
his research like documents of the Katipunan, interview with the veterans of the
Revolution, and correspondence between and among Katipuneros.

However, a student should not be confused about what counts as a

primary or a secondary source. As mentioned above, the classification of sources
between primary and secondary depends not on the period when the source was
produced or the type of the source but on the subject of the historical research.
For example, a textbook is usually classified as a secondary source, a tertiary
source even. However, this classification is usual but not automatic. If a historian
chooses to write the history of education in the 1980s, he can utilize textbooks
used in that period as a primary source. If a historian wishes to study the
historiography of the Filipino-American War for example, he can use works of
different authors on the topic as his primary source as well.

Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and learning
history. However, historians and students of history need to thoroughly scrutinize
these historical sources to avoid deception and to come up with the historical
truth. The historian should be able to conduct an external and internal criticism of
the source, especially primary sources which can age in centuries. External
criticism is the practice of verifyıng the authenticity of evidence by examining its
physical characteristics; consistency with the historical characteristic of the time
when it was produced; and the materials used for the evidence. Examples of the
things that will be examined when conducting external criticism of a document
include the quality of the paper, the type of the ink, and the language and words
used in the material, among others.

Internal criticism, on the other hand, is the examination of the truthfulness

of the evidence. It looks at the content of the source and examines the
circumstance of its production. Internal critic1sm looks at the truthfulness and
factuality of the evidence by looking at the author of the source, 1ts context, the
agenda behind its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended
purpose, among others. For example, Japanese reports and declarations during
the period of the war should not be taken as a historical fact hastily. Internal
criticism entails that the historian acknowledge and analyze how such reports
can be manipulated to be used as war propaganda. Validating historical sources
is important because the use of unverified, falsified, and untruthful historical
sources can lead to equally false conclusions. Without thorough criticisms of
historical evidences, historical deceptions and lies will be highly probable.

One of the most scandalous cases of deception in Philippine history is the

hoax Code of Kalantiaw. The code was a set of rules contained in an epic,
Maragtas, which was allegedly written by a certain Datu Kalantiaw. The
document was sold to the National Library and was regarded as an important
precolonial document until 1968, when American historian William Henry Scott
debunked the authenticity of the code due to anachronism and lack of evidence
to prove that the code existed in the precolonial Philippine society. Ferdinand
Marcos also claimed that he was a decorated World War II soldier who led a
guerilla unit called Ang Maharlika. This was widely believed by students of history
and Marcos had war medals to show. This claim, however, was disproven when
historians counterchecked Marcos's claims with the war records of the United
States. These cases prove how decepti0ns can propagate without rigorous
historical research.

The task of the historian is to look at the available historical sources and
select the most relevant and meaningful for history and for the subject matter that
he is studying. History, like other academic discipline, has come a long way but
still has a lot of remaining tasks to do. It does not claim to render absolute and
exact judgment because as long as questions are continuously asked, and as
long as time unfolds, the study of history can never be complete. The task of the
historian is to organize the past that is being created so that it can offer lessons
for nations, societies, and civilization. It is the historian's job to seek for the
meaning of recovering the past to let the people see the continuing relevance of
provenance, memory, remembering, and historical understanding for both the
present and the future.
Philippine historiography underwent several changes since the
precolonial period until the present. Ancient Filipinos narrated their history
through communal songs and epics that they passed orally from a generation to
another. When the Spaniards came, their chroniclers started recording their
observations through written accounts. The perspective of historical writing and
inquiry also shifted. The Spanish colonizers narrated the history of their colony in
a bipartite view they saw the age before colonization as a dark period in the
history of the islands, until they brought light through Western thought and
Christianity. Early nationalists refuted this perspective and argued the tripartite
view. They saw the precolonial society as a luminous age that ended with
darkness when the colonizers captured their freedom. They believed that the
light would come again once the colonizers were evicted from the Philippines.
Filipino historian Zeus Salazar introduced the new guiding philosophy for writing
and teaching history: pantayong pananaw (for us-from us perspective). This
perspective highlights the importance of facilitating an internal conversation and
discourse among Filipinos about our own history, using the language that is
understood by everyone.

Reference:
Readings in Philippine History
Authors: John Lee P. Candelaria & Veronica C. Alporha
ACTIVITY no. 1

NAME: CODE (number):

COURSE & YEAR: SCHEDULE:

A. True or False. Write true if the statement is true. Otherwise, write false in the space
provided.
1. History is the study of the past. ________

2. Historical sources that were not written should not be used in writing
history._______

3. The subject of historiography is history itself. ________

4. History has no use for the present, thus, the saying past is past is true.
_________

5. History is limited to the story of a hero versus a villain.________

6. Only primary sources may be used in writing history. ________

7. There are three types of sources: primary, secondary, and tertiary

sources._______

8. External criticism is done by examining the physical characteristics of a

source._______

9. Internal criticism is done by looking at a source's quality of paper and type

of ink, among others. _______

10. The historians are the only source of history._______

B. What Source? Read the following scenarios and classify the sources discovered as
primary, secondary, or tertiary sources. Write your answer in the space provided.
1. Jose was exploring the library in his new school in Manila. He wanted to study
the history of Calamba, Laguna during the nineteenth century. In one of the
books, he saw an old photograph of a woman standing in front of an old church,
clipped among the pages. At the back of the photo was a fine inscription that
says: "Kalamba, 19 de Junio 1861."

Is the photograph a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source? Explain.

2. It was Lean's first day in his first year of college in a big university. His excitement
made him come to class unusually early and he found their classroom empty. He
explored the classroom and sat at the teacher's table. He looked at the table
drawer and saw a book entitled U.G. An Underground Tale: The Journey of
Edgar Jopson and the First Quarter Storm Generation. He started reading the
book and realized that it was a biography of a student leader turned political
activist during the time of Ferdinand Marcos. The author used interviews with
friends and family of Jopson, and other primary documents related to his works
and life.

Is the book a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source? Explain.

3. Lorena was a new teacher of Araling Panlipunan in a Small elementary school in

Mauban, Quezon. Her colleagues gave her the new textbook that she ought to
use in class. Before the class started, Lorena studied the textbook carefully. She
noted that the authors used works by other known historians in writing the
textbook. She saw that the bibliography included Teodoro Agoncillo's The Revolt
of the Masses and The Fateful Years: Japan's Adventure in the Philippines,
1941-45. She also saw that the authors used Ma. Luisa Camagay's Working
Women of Manila During the 19th Century and many others.

Is the textbook a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source? Explain.

4. Manuel visited the United States for a few months to see his relatives who have
lived there for decades. His uncle brought him on tours around Illinois. Manuel
visited the Field Museum of Natural History where a golden image of a woman
caught his eye. Manuel looked closer and read that the image was called "The
Golden Tara." It originated from Agusan Del Sur and was bought by the museum
in 1922. It was believed to be made prior to the arrival of the Spaniards in the
Philippines.

Is the sculpture a primary, secondary, or tertiary source? Explain.

5. Gregoria loved to travel around the country. She liked bringing with her a travel
brochure that informs her of the different sites worth visiting in the area. Her
travel brochure was usually produced by the tourism department of the province.
It shows pictures of destinations visited by tourists and a few basic information
about the place like the origin of the name, the historical significance of the place,
and some other information acquired by the office's researchers and writers.

Is the travel brochure a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source? Explain.