Introduction to History: Definition, Relevance, Sources and Methodology

A. Lecture Notes

The Definition and Meaning Of History

History cannot be restricted to the common definition as the “ study of the past of mankind”.
Various definitions of history with insights to its meaning from renowned historians, foreign and Filipino
alike were compiled for purposes of academic discussion.

History is derived from the Greek noun, iotopla ( historia) which means learning or knowledge
acquired through inquiry or investigation (Gottschalk). And according to the Greek philosopher Aristotle,
History meant a systematic account of a set of natural phenomena .

• Most Common definition – “the past of mankind,” cannot be restricted

• History was derived from the Greek word historia

• Fortiori – a generation of long dead,the reconstruction of the total past is unattainable

Ambeth Ocampo (2012) provided another definition of history as the working definition of
history or kasaysayan as a narrative which can be written, visual, oral or a combination of all three about
past events that has meaning to a certain group of people in a given time and place. These two
components of kasaysayan --- salaysay andsaysay are inseperable. Without both, you cannot have true
history.

Renato Constantino (1985) defined History as the recorded struggle of people for increasing
freedom and newer and higher realization of human person. It is not just merely a chronology of events,
not a story of heroes and great men.

Why the need to study History?

Fundamentally, we cannot stay away from history. It offers the only extensive evidential base in
the analysis of how societies function and people need to understand as to how societies function
simply to run their own lives. History will suffice to explain not only a major developments in society but
we need to look further back to identify the causes of change. The following show the importance of
History to us, to wit:

1. History raise our historical consciousness essential to national development

2. It enable us to exercise the faculty of criticism through intelligent reading

3. It helps us learn what man did in the past and to gain insights into the nature of our present
difficulties by projecting people’s history

4. It gives us the proper perspectives to formulate correct policies in the future

5. Though history, we learn lessons from the past in order to apply to the present so that we
may act correctly in the future

6. It our scientific guide to understanding the present and future

7. It raises our historical consciousness so as to develop a commitment for the oppressed

Historiography

Santillian, Neil Martial R.( 2016) expounded that individuals who write history are called the
historians. They seek to understand the present by examining what happened before. They undertake
laborious historical research and investigation to come up with meaningful and organized reconstruction
of the past. A salient feature of historical writing is the ability to give meaning and impart value to a
particular group of people about their past. This practice of historical writing is called historiography.
The old way of conducting research in history focuses on gathering documents from libraries and
archives to form a pool of evidence in writing an analytical historical narrative. However, the modern
historical writing does not only involve the examination of documents but utilize scientific research
methods and complements with archeology and geography’s related study areas.

Sources of History

Basic in doing historical research involve the use of various sources such as documents,
archeological records, oral and video accounts. Documents are the handwritten, printed, drawn,
designed and other composed materials. Examples of these are books, newspapers, maps, commercial
ads, photographs. A significant part of our collection ofdocuments here and abroad particularly in Spain
and United States are the colonial records that includes government reports and legal documents.
Similarly, memoirs or personal accounts written by important personalities like the Philippine presidents
constitute another type of documents .

Archeological records refer to the preserved remains of the human beings. The most significant

archeological finds in the Philippines include the Callao man’s toe bone ( dated 67,000 BCE) and the
skullcap of the Tabon Cave woman (22,000 BCE). Artifacts and fossils are another archeological records.
Fossils are the remains of animals, plants and other organisms from the distant past, while artifacts
evidences of the remnants of material culture developed by humans. Examples of these artifacts include
like stone tools, farm implements, clothing, and pottery . The third kind of historical source are the oral
and video accounts or audio-visual documentations of people, places and events.

A lot of historical narratives rely heavily on documentary sources due to voluminous written
records. Several historical documents about an event are counterchecked for facts, but many historical
researchers are confronted with the basic challenge of reading and translating sources written in foreign
languages. Many of our untapped archival documents here and abroad are written in Spanish. A good
knowledge of the Spanish language is a huge advantage, a skill which is now unusual among
contemporary historians who prefer to read the English translations of primary sources like the 55-
volume The Philippine Island (1493- 1898) edited by Emma Blair and James Robertson.
Another daunting task for the Filipino historian is on how to discern the cultural context and
historical value of primary sources peppered with western cultural biases. Uncovering myths, correcting
distortions and misconceptions about our ethnic culture and Filipino cultural identity propagated by the
Spanish and American colonizers posed as extra challenging for modern day Filipino scholars and
researches.

Historical criticism

Historical criticism, also known as the historical-critical method or higher criticism, is a branch of
criticism that investigates the origins of ancient texts in order to understand "the world behind the text"
(Wikipedia Examining a written document for factual truth requires a discerning mind to scrutinize and
categorize a primary source from secondary source to avoid deception and come up with the historical
truth.

To determine the authenticity and reliability of a document, the historian need to employ two
levels of historical criticism. External criticism is the practice of verifying the authenticity (genuineness)
of evidence or document by examining its physical characteristics, consistency with the historical
characteristic of the time when it was produced. It answers questions related to the genuineness of a
historical text by identifying who compose the material, locating when and where the historical material
was produced. Examples of the things that will be examined when conducting external criticism of a
document include the quality of the paper, the type of ink, the language and words used in the
document.

Internal criticism on the other is the examination of the truthfulness and factuality of the
evidence by looking at the author of the source, its context, the agenda/motive behind its creation, the
knowledge which informed it and its intended purpose among others. It looks at the content of the
source/document and examines the circumstance of its production. deals with the credibility and
reliability of the content of the source as well as understanding the substance , the content and message
of the narrative. For example, Japanese reports and pronouncements during the war should not be
taken as historical facts. Another example is what you read in the social media are not always truthful
and correct because of the proliferation of fake news. As such , internal criticism entails that the
historian to acknowledge and analyze how such reports can be manipulated for propaganda. Validating
historical sources is important because the use of unverified, falsified and untruthful historical sources
can equally lead to false conclusions. Without thorough criticisms of historical evidences historical
deceptions, distortions, lies and revisionism will be highly probable.
Why Study History? (1998) By Peter N. Stearns

People live in the present. They plan for and worry about the future. History, however, is the study of
the past. Given all the demands that press in from living in the present and anticipating what is yet to
come, why bother with what has been? Given all the desirable and available branches of knowledge,
why insist—as most American educational programs do—on a good bit of history? And why urge many
students to study even more history than they are required to?

Any subject of study needs justification: its advocates must explain why it is worth attention. Most
widely accepted subjects—and history is certainly one of them—attract some people who simply like
the information and modes of thought involved. But audiences less spontaneously drawn to the subject
and more doubtful about why to bother need to know what the purpose is.

Historians do not perform heart transplants, improve highway design, or arrest criminals. In a society
that quite correctly expects education to serve useful purposes, the functions of history can seem more
difficult to define than those of engineering or medicine. History is in fact very useful, actually
indispensable, but the products of historical study are less tangible, sometimes less immediate, than
those that stem from some other disciplines.

In the past history has been justified for reasons we would no longer accept. For instance, one of the
reasons history holds its place in current education is because earlier leaders believed that a knowledge
of certain historical facts helped distinguish the educated from the uneducated; the person who could
reel off the date of the Norman conquest of England (1066) or the name of the person who came up
with the theory of evolution at about the same time that Darwin did (Wallace) was deemed superior—a
better candidate for law school or even a business promotion. Knowledge of historical facts has been
used as a screening device in many societies, from China to the United States, and the habit is still with
us to some extent. Unfortunately, this use can encourage mindless memorization—a real but not very
appealing aspect of the discipline. History should be studied because it is essential to individuals and to
society, and because it harbors beauty. There are many ways to discuss the real functions of the subject
—as there are many different historical talents and many different paths to historical meaning. All
definitions of history's utility, however, rely on two fundamental facts.

History Helps Us Understand People and Societies

In the first place, history offers a storehouse of information about how people and societies behave.
Understanding the operations of people and societies is difficult, though a number of disciplines make
the attempt. An exclusive reliance on current data would needlessly handicap our efforts. How can we
evaluate war if the nation is at peace—unless we use historical materials? How can we understand
genius, the influence of technological innovation, or the role that beliefs play in shaping family life, if we
don't use what we know about experiences in the past? Some social scientists attempt to
formulate laws or theories about human behavior. But even these recourses depend on historical
information, except for in limited, often artificial cases in which experiments can be devised to
determine how people act. Major aspects of a society's operation, like mass elections, missionary
activities, or military alliances, cannot be set up as precise experiments. Consequently, history must
serve, however imperfectly, as our laboratory, and data from the past must serve as our most vital
evidence in the unavoidable quest to figure out why our complex species behaves as it does in societal
settings. This, fundamentally, is why we cannot stay away from history: it offers the only extensive
evidential base for the contemplation and analysis of how societies function, and people need to have
some sense of how societies function simply to run their own lives.

History Helps Us Understand Change and How the Society We Live in Came to Be

The second reason history is inescapable as a subject of serious study follows closely on the first. The
past causes the present, and so the future. Any time we try to know why something happened—
whether a shift in political party dominance in the American Congress, a major change in the teenage
suicide rate, or a war in the Balkans or the Middle East—we have to look for factors that took shape
earlier. Sometimes fairly recent history will suffice to explain a major development, but often we need to
look further back to identify the causes of change. Only through studying history can we grasp how
things change; only through history can we begin to comprehend the factors that cause change; and
only through history can we understand what elements of an institution or a society persist despite
change.

The Importance of History in Our Own Lives

These two fundamental reasons for studying history underlie more specific and quite diverse uses of
history in our own lives. History well told is beautiful. Many of the historians who most appeal to the
general reading public know the importance of dramatic and skillful writing—as well as of accuracy.
Biography and military history appeal in part because of the tales they contain. History as art and
entertainment serves a real purpose, on aesthetic grounds but also on the level of human
understanding. Stories well done are stories that reveal how people and societies have actually
functioned, and they prompt thoughts about the human experience in other times and places. The same
aesthetic and humanistic goals inspire people to immerse themselves in efforts to reconstruct quite
remote pasts, far removed from immediate, present- day utility. Exploring what historians sometimes
call the "pastness of the past"—the ways people in distant ages constructed their lives—
involves a sense of beauty and excitement, and ultimately another perspective on human life and
society.

History Contributes to Moral Understanding

History also provides a terrain for moral contemplation. Studying the stories of individuals and situations
in the past allows a student of history to test his or her own moral sense, to hone it against some of the
real complexities individuals have faced in difficult settings. People who have weathered adversity not
just in some work of fiction, but in real, historical circumstances can provide inspiration. "History
teaching by example" is one phrase that describes this use of a study of the past—a study not
only of certifiable heroes, the great men and women of history who successfully worked through moral
dilemmas, but also of more ordinary people who provide lessons in courage, diligence, or constructive
protest.
History Provides Identity

History also helps provide identity, and this is unquestionably one of the reasons all modern nations
encourage its teaching in some form. Historical data include evidence about how families, groups,
institutions and whole countries were formed and about how they have evolved while retaining
cohesion. For many Americans, studying the history of one's own family is the most obvious use of
history, for it provides facts about genealogy and (at a slightly more complex level) a basis for
understanding how the family has interacted with larger historical change. Family identity is established
and confirmed. Many institutions, businesses, communities, and social units, such as ethnic groups in
the United States, use history for similar identity purposes. Merely defining the group in the present
pales against the possibility of forming an identity based on a rich past. And of course nations use
identity history as well—and sometimes abuse it. Histories that tell the national story, emphasizing
distinctive features of the national experience, are meant to drive home an understanding of national
values and a commitment to national loyalty.

Studying History Is Essential for Good Citizenship

A study of history is essential for good citizenship. This is the most common justification for the place of
history in school curricula. Sometimes advocates of citizenship history hope merely to promote national
identity and loyalty through a history spiced by vivid stories and lessons in individual success and
morality. But the importance of history for citizenship goes beyond this narrow goal and can even
challenge it at some points.

History that lays the foundation for genuine citizenship returns, in one sense, to the essential uses of the
study of the past. History provides data about the emergence of national institutions, problems, and
values—it's the only significant storehouse of such data available. It offers evidence also about
how nations have interacted with other societies, providing international and comparative perspectives
essential for responsible citizenship. Further, studying history helps us understand how recent, current,
and prospective changes that affect the lives of citizens are emerging or may emerge and what causes
are involved. More important, studying history encourages habits of mind that are vital for responsible
public behavior, whether as a national or community leader, an informed voter, a petitioner, or a simple
observer.

What Skills Does a Student of History Develop?

What does a well-trained student of history, schooled to work on past materials and on case studies in
social change, learn how to do? The list is manageable, but it contains several overlapping categories.

The Ability to Assess Evidence. The study of history builds experience in dealing with and assessing
various kinds of evidence—the sorts of evidence historians use in shaping the most accurate pictures of
the past that they can. Learning how to interpret the statements of past political leaders—one kind of
evidence—helps form the capacity to distinguish between the objective and the self-serving among
statements made by present-day political leaders. Learning how to combine different kinds of evidence
—public statements, private records, numerical data, visual materials—develops the ability to make
coherent arguments based on a variety of data. This skill can also be applied to information encountered
in everyday life.

The Ability to Assess Conflicting Interpretations. Learning history means gaining some skill in sorting
through diverse, often conflicting interpretations. Understanding how societies work—the central goal
of historical study—is inherently imprecise, and the same certainly holds true for understanding what is
going on in the present day. Learning how to identify and evaluate conflicting interpretations is an
essential citizenship skill for which history, as an often-contested laboratory of human experience,
provides training. This is one area in which the full benefits of historical study sometimes clash with the
narrower uses of the past to construct identity. Experience in examining past situations provides a
constructively critical sense that can be applied to partisan claims about the glories of national or group
identity. The study of history in no sense undermines loyalty or commitment, but it does teach the need
for assessing arguments, and it provides opportunities to engage in debate and achieve perspective.

Experience in Assessing Past Examples of Change. Experience in assessing past examples of change is

vital to understanding change in society today—it's an essential skill in what we are regularly told
is our "ever-changing world." Analysis of change means developing some capacity for
determining the magnitude and significance of change, for some changes are more fundamental than
others. Comparing particular changes to relevant examples from the past helps students of history
develop this capacity. The ability to identify the continuities that always accompany even the most
dramatic changes also comes from studying history, as does the skill to determine probable causes of
change. Learning history helps one figure out, for example, if one main factor—such as a technological
innovation or some deliberate new policy—accounts for a change or whether, as is more commonly the
case, a number of factors combine to generate the actual change that occurs.

Historical study, in sum, is crucial to the promotion of that elusive creature, the well-informed citizen. It
provides basic factual information about the background of our political institutions and about the
values and problems that affect our social well-being. It also contributes to our capacity to use evidence,
assess interpretations, and analyze change and continuities. No one can ever quite deal with the present
as the historian deals with the past—we lack the perspective for this feat; but we can move in this
direction by applying historical habits of mind, and we will function as better citizens in the process.

History Is Useful in the World of Work

History is useful for work. Its study helps create good businesspeople, professionals, and political
leaders. The number of explicit professional jobs for historians is considerable, but most people who
study history do not become professional historians. Professional historians teach at various levels, work
in museums and media centers, do historical research for businesses or public agencies, or participate in
the growing number of historical consultancies. These categories are important—indeed vital—to keep
the basic enterprise of history going, but most people who study history use their training for broader
professional purposes. Students of history find their experience directly relevant to jobs in a variety of
careers as well as to further study in fields like law and public administration. Employers often
deliberately seek students with the kinds of capacities historical study promotes. The reasons are not
hard to identify: students of history acquire, by studying different phases of the past and different
societies in the past, a broad perspective that gives them the range and flexibility required in many work
situations. They develop research skills, the ability to find and evaluate sources of information, and the
means to identify and evaluate diverse interpretations. Work in history also improves basic writing and
speaking skills and is directly relevant to many of the analytical requirements in the public and private
sectors, where the capacity to identify, assess, and explain trends is essential. Historical study is
unquestionably an asset for a variety of work and professional situations, even though it does not, for
most students, lead as directly to a particular job slot, as do some technical fields. But history
particularly prepares students for the long haul in their careers, its qualities helping adaptation and
advancement beyond entry-level employment. There is no denying that in our society many people who
are drawn to historical study worry about relevance. In our changing economy, there is concern about
job futures in most fields. Historical training is not, however, an indulgence; it applies directly to many
careers and can clearly help us in our working lives.

Why study history? The answer is because we virtually must, to gain access to the laboratory of human
experience. When we study it reasonably well, and so acquire some usable habits of mind, as well as
some basic data about the forces that affect our own lives, we emerge with relevant skills and an
enhanced capacity for informed citizenship, critical thinking, and simple awareness. The uses of history
are varied. Studying history can help us develop some literally "salable" skills, but its study
must not be pinned down to the narrowest utilitarianism. Some history—that confined to personal
recollections about changes and continuities in the immediate environment—is essential to function
beyond childhood. Some history depends on personal taste, where one finds beauty, the joy of
discovery, or intellectual challenge. Between the inescapable minimum and the pleasure of deep
commitment comes the history that, through cumulative skill in interpreting the unfolding human
record, provides a real grasp of how the world works.
DIFFERENT SOURCES OF HISTORY (Adapted from Emma Groeneveld)

History (from the Greek ἱστορία, meaning ‘a learning or knowing by inquiry’) can be broadly
taken to indicate the past in general but is usually defined as the study of the past from the point at
which there were written sources onwards.

There are obstacles that make it so we do not have a crystal clear, uninterrupted view of the
past. Firstly, we have to remember that everyone – not just us, but also people throughout history – is
shaped by their upbringing and the societies and times they live in, and we need to be careful not to
stick our own labels and values onto past periods. Secondly, our view of the past is made up from the
total of things that somehow happened to survive the test of time, which is due to coincidences and
decisions made by people before our time. So, we only get a fragmentary, distorted view; it is like trying
to complete a puzzle with a lot of oddly shaped and missing pieces.

To fill in the context of the past we wish to study involves carefully questioning a whole bunch of
sources – not just written ones – and avoiding pitfalls as much as possible. The closely connected field of
archaeology offers a priceless helping hand in achieving this, so these sources will be discussed here,
too.

What are the Sources of Historical knowledge?

Sources are our way of peering into the past, but the various kinds all present their own benefits
and difficulties. The first distinction to make is between primary and secondary sources. A primary
source is first-hand material that stems (roughly) from the time period that one wants to examine,
whereas a secondary source is an additional step removed from that period – a 'second-hand' work that
is the result of reconstructing and interpreting the past using the primary material, such as textbooks,
articles, and, of course, websites such as this one.

A. PRIMARY SOURCES

However cool actual sources from times gone by may be, we cannot simply assume that
everything they tell us (or everything we think they tell us) is true, or that we are automatically able to
interpret their contents and context correctly. They were made by people, from within their own
contexts. Keeping a critical eye and asking questions is thus the way to go, and it is a good idea to cross-
examine different sources on the same topic to see whether any kind of consensus rolls out.

Some general questions you should ask of any type of source are:

• What type of source is it? What does its form tell us? Is it a neatly engraved inscription, an
undecorated, heavily used bit of earthenware, or a roughly scribbled letter on cheap paper?

• Who created the source? How did they gather the necessary information? Were they an
eyewitness, or did they rely on researching other sources or on the stories of people who had
witnessed the event? Could they be biased?
• With which goal was the source created? Did the creator want to tell a truthful story or, for
instance, influence others through propaganda? How reliable does that make it?

• What is the context in which the source was created? To understand a source, it helps to know
something about the society and immediate context in which it was made. A Christian source
written while Christianity was still a persecuted religion differs from one after Christianity was
made the official religion. Compare it with other sources from the same period/that concern the
same subject to help you assess how reliable the source may be and help you interpret its
content.

• What is the content of the source and how do we interpret it? What does it tell us and what
does it not tell us? What are its limitations? What sorts of questions could this source answer?

1. Written sources

Some examples of primary written sources are contemporary letters, eyewitness accounts,
official documents, political declarations and decrees, administrative texts, and histories and biographies
written in the period that is to be studied.

The unmatched level of detail presented by written sources in general is an obvious goldmine to
the greedy historian. Moreover, reading a written source tends to tell you something about the author
and the context in which they are writing just as well as the topic they concern themselves with.

The detail in some written sources can lead to unexpected discoveries, such as the astonishing
fact that the Phoenicians already sailed around Cape of Good Hope (South Africa) in open boats as early
as 600 BCE. Herodotus, the ‘father of history’, writes in his Histories – a work recounting the events of
the Greco-Persian Wars (499-479 BCE) – that South of the equator, the sun would indeed have been on
the sailors' right-hand side while sailing westward around the Cape – a detail the sailors could not have
known if they had not actually witnessed it, so it appears to be true.

The first hurdle with written sources is their transmission; materials such as papyrus,
parchment, and paper do not have infinite lifespans, so the sources we have in front of us right now
have usually been copied, reviewed, edited, even translated, at some point in time, and may include
mistakes or deliberate changes. This puts a thin barrier between us and the original text.

Secondly, authors may not be reliable, may have been biased, or may have had certain
intentions that jeopardise the source's objectivity. Forgery is unfortunately also not entirely outside the
realm of possibilities, as the Donatio Constantini (the Donation of Constantine) makes painfully clear.
Asking the following questions can help canvass these issues:

• Who created the source and what was his or her background?

People are undeniably connected with their backgrounds – upbringing, family, the times they lived in,
and so forth, and we have to examine the source from within this framework.

• What do we know of the context in which the source was created?

The prevailing values, schools of thought, religion, the political situation, possible censure, as well as
whether the source was perhaps commissioned by someone or not, all have an impact on the contents
of a source. Comparing a source to other (types of) sources from the same period or concerning the
same topic can help determine its reliability and help you form a picture of what may have actually
happened.

• Did the creator have a specific goal or a specific audience?

A personal letter with the goal of declaring the author’s love to his recipient yields a different kind of
information than a piece of propaganda written in order to strengthen a ruler’s position. Of course, the
goal may not be quite as easy to spot as that.

Thirdly, it is important to check whether the author was actually around for the events they are
writing about. Questions to ask are:

• Was the author a contemporary and/or an eyewitness?

• If no: where did they get their information and how reliable was that information? It could
have come from documents, eyewitnesses, or other sources available to them.

• If yes: did they personally witness the event they are describing? How accurate is their
memory? Being alive at the same time as Empress Wu from Song China, for instance, does not
automatically mean you were in a position to see which clothes she wore on a specific Monday
morning.

Herodotus, for instance, was not an eyewitness himself, and although usually of decent critical
mind, he sometimes fell flat in his judgement of his sources - the person who convinced him that the
hind legs of camels have four thigh bones and four knee-joints must have been well chuffed. (Hdt.
III.103). Furthermore, when entire speeches are recorded word-for-word, one must wonder how
plausible it is, firstly, that the eyewitness remembered all of it, sometimes for a long stretch of time,
and, secondly, that the author then recorded the whole speech exactly as recited by his witness, without
shaping it to suit his desired narrative.

2. Epigraphy

Epigraphy refers to the study of inscriptions engraved upon various surfaces such as stone,
metal, wood, clay tablets, or even wax, which may vary hugely in length from mere abbreviated words
and administrative tablets to depicting entire official decrees.

Usually, inscriptions tend to be pretty durable because of the nature of the materials that were
used, although whether or not the inscription has been exposed to the elements makes a bit of a
difference. They were often intended to be publicly visible, catching the eye like a big neon sign, their
content shared with as many people as possible.

This often public nature does not mean inscriptions should just be mindlessly accepted to reflect
the exact truth, though; they had authors or commissioners who had certain purposes. Sometimes
inscriptions even turn out to be forged, or have been moved and are no longer in their original locations.
Things to keep in mind are:

• Who created or commissioned the inscription?

Is this, for instance, a lonely mother who had an elaborate, glorifying, and soppy inscription
engraved on the headstone of her young son’s grave, for passers-by to see, or is it a ruler’s proclamation
which subtly connects himself with a divine power?

• What is the goal of the inscription?

Perhaps it was created to inform, to record, to glorify, or to influence public opinion.

• Can it be dated (by things like the context, monument, or the language), and does the date
match the content of the inscription?

3. Settlements, buildings, & monuments

The daily lives of people become visible through the remains of their houses and the buildings
they made use of, such as courts of law, bakeries, or schools. Monuments, also not unusually flashing
inscriptions at its audience, can reveal the messages their normally powerful creators cried out to the
world through their architecture and imagery. As such, they can be used to reconstruct the structure of
societies.

Of course, the actual durability varies immensely, and sometimes not much more than the
groundworks remain. We must thus ask:

• How do we accurately reconstruct the remains (physically or on paper)?

Archaeologists have become quite adept at 'reading' the pieces that are left; comparing the
remains with others that may be more fully preserved or with primary sources describing the structure;
and rebuilding what is essentially a hugely complex 3D puzzle, either on paper or by actually restoring
the remains in question. Bits and pieces may have been carted off, destroyed, moved around, fallen
over, and so forth, so it is important to keep in mind that the puzzle process may require some
guesswork and may result in mistakes being made.

• What is the function of the structure?

• How do we interpret what it may tell us about a culture?

The site of Palenque – an important Maya city situated in present-day Mexico – for instance, is
home to a group of temples that fit within a context of both propaganda and symbolism. The Temples of
the Cross, Foliated Cross, and Sun, dedicated in 692 CE, were commissioned by king Kan Balam. Their
sculptures and reliefs illustrate the king’s connection with the gods: he is depicted as a guardian of
fertility, maize, and rain.

Kan Balam moreover legitimised his rule by depicting his genealogy as well as a scene in which
he receives his power from his ancestors. More practically, these temples were important ceremonial
centres too. At this site, the political is thus visibly linked with the ritual context – something that fits
well within the broader Mayan cultural context – and, as a source, it must be interpreted within this
framework.

4. Artefacts

Artefacts are man-made things of archaeological interest, often from a cultural context.
Examples are pottery, utensils, tools and jewellery, which can alert us to daily lives, style and culture; art
– including statues – which can be both public and private and reflects the society in some way; and
coins, which are more political - often standardised, they proclaim a visible message that tends to serve
as propaganda to bolster a ruler’s image. We should ask of each artefact:

• What was its use or purpose?

• What might it tell us about the society’s structure and culture?

An example lies within the 15th- and 16th-century CE Korean Buncheong wares – practically
used ceramics that were blue-green with a white slip, typically decorated with combinations of
geometric and natural shapes such as peonies, birds and fish, enhanced with dots. They are interesting
not just because of their homely context and the light they shed on daily lives but also because they
were produced by potteries that were not controlled by the state – in contrast to other types of Korean
pottery. This means that Buncheong wares show a lot of regional flavour and out- of-the-box variation,
as well as showing the preferences of the people who ordered the wares. This helps us colour in the
lives and homes of ordinary Koreans living at that time.

5. Bones

Studying bones yields clues regarding health, gender, age, size, diet, etc. Retrieval of ancient
DNA – though not exactly a walk in the park – is also possible. The context in which bones are found as
well as the point in time they came from help to fill information regarding their societies. This is already
valuable in support of historical sources, as, for instance, mass graves of victims of the black death
support the image created by the written record, but for the prehistoric side of things, bones are truly
indispensable in helping us fill in the blanks.

For places such as Australia, we have no written sources until westerners came brutally barging
in in 1788 CE. Here, bones can alert us to the prehistoric human presence in specific areas. For instance,
through tracing bones found at sites such as Malakunanja 2 in Australia’s Northern Territory, dated to
around 53,000 years old, and the famous Lake Mungo burials in southern Australia dated to around
41,000 years old, we can fill in Australia’s initial colonisation.

Dating bones is not always a straightforward matter, though. Things to keep in mind are:

• Is the dating scientifically and/or archaeologically accurate? Could there be contamination,

could sediments have shifted or could the bones have been moved?
• How should the context in which the bones were found be interpreted? What does the
context tell you about the bones themselves?

B. SECONDARY SOURCES

After the maze that is primary sources, we may be tempted to think secondary sources are a
sort of safe haven, where skilled researchers have taken all of the above-mentioned issues into account
and have already come as close to actual history as possible.

However, this would be naïve; the people writing the secondary material are just as bound to
their own contexts as the ancients they are studying. Again, then, we must be wary of possible bias and
goals, as well as of the accuracy – it is all too easy to draw conclusions that support your hypothesis.
Even if a secondary source may appear reliable in that it shows you which sources they have used and
seems to draw logical conclusions from them, it is still possible that the author has hand-picked exactly
those sources that support their story, rather than presenting the full picture (which may contradict or
add more nuance to their story). To prevent being misled, it is important to always study more than one
secondary sources. Compare different books and articles on the subject you are researching, and, after
assessing each source's reliability, strengths and weaknesses, try to get as complete a view as possible of
the topic.

When using secondary sources, it thus helps to ask these questions:

• Has the author been trained in the right field, and does he or she have decent credit in the
academic world? Reading reviews can be of great assistance here.

• Where was the source published and could that impact the contents at all? Also, when it
comes to articles, some journals have better reputations than others.

• When was the source published? Times change. A textbook written in the 1960s CE may not
have had access to all the information we have right now and may be colored by the time’s
prevailing ideas about how to approach the study of history.

• What is the scope of the source? Social histories paint a different picture than military ones, so
be sure to choose sources that correspond with the questions you yourself want to answer.

• Which sources has the author used and how critical has he or she been? It is important the
author has documented his or her use of sources, so you can examine them yourself if need be.
Keep an eye out for selective use of sources; an author should not simply choose the sources
that fit their hypothesis but should take the full range of primary information into account.

The materials to be questioned vary from, for instance, textbooks and course books to
independent books, articles (including scientific ones, whose accuracy may be hard to judge by a non-
scientist), and websites – but be sure to pick ones that show source lists and authors’ names. As long as
you stay critical, there is a wealth of information at your disposal.
Historical method

Historical method comprises the techniques and guidelines by which historians use primary
sources and other evidence to research and then to write histories in the form of accounts of the past.
The question of the nature, and even the possibility, of a sound historical method is raised in the
philosophy of history as a question of epistemology. The study of historical method and writing is known
as historiography.

Source criticism

Core principles

The following core principles of source criticism were formulated by two Scandinavian
historians, Olden-Jørgensen (1998) and Thurén (1997):[1]

• Human sources may be relics such as a fingerprint; or narratives such as a statement or a

letter. Relics are more credible sources than narratives.

• Any given source may be forged or corrupted. Strong indications of the originality of the
source increase its reliability.

• The closer a source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more one can trust it to
give an accurate historical description of what actually happened.

• A primary source is more reliable than a secondary source which is more reliable than a
tertiary source, and so on.

• If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message
is strongly increased.

• The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should
be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations.

• If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in creating bias then
the credibility of the message is increased.

Procedures

Bernheim (1889) and Langlois & Seignobos (1898) proposed a seven-step procedure for source criticism
in history:[2]

1. If the sources all agree about an event, historians can consider the event proved.

2. However, majority does not rule; even if most sources relate events in one way, that version
will not prevail unless it passes the test of critical textual analysis.

3. The source whose account can be confirmed by reference to outside authorities in some of its
parts can be trusted in its entirety if it is impossible similarly to confirm the entire text.
4. When two sources disagree on a particular point, the historian will prefer the source with
most "authority"—that is the source created by the expert or by the eyewitness.

5. Eyewitnesses are, in general, to be preferred especially in circumstances where the ordinary

observer could have accurately reported what transpired and, more specifically, when they deal
with facts known by most contemporaries.

6. If two independently created sources agree on a matter, the reliability of each is measurably
enhanced.

7. When two sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, then historians take
the source which seems to accord best with common sense.

External criticism: authenticity and provenance

Garraghan divides criticism into six inquiries[3]

1. When was the source, written or unwritten, produced (date)?

2. Where was it produced (localization)?

3. By whom was it produced (authorship)?

4. From what pre-existing material was it produced (analysis)?

5. In what original form was it produced (integrity)?

6. What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)?

The first four are known as higher criticism; the fifth, lower criticism; and, together, external
criticism. The sixth and final inquiry about a source is called internal criticism.

R. J. Shafer on external criticism: "It sometimes is said that its function is negative, merely saving
us from using false evidence; whereas internal criticism has the positive function of telling us
how to use authenticated evidence."[4]

Internal criticism: historical reliability

Noting that few documents are accepted as completely reliable, Louis Gottschalk sets down the general
rule, "for each particular of a document the process of establishing credibility should be separately
undertaken regardless of the general credibility of the author." An author's trustworthiness in the main
may establish a background probability for the consideration of each statement, but each piece of
evidence extracted must be weighed individually.
Eyewitness evidence

R. J. Shafer offers this checklist for evaluating eyewitness testimony:

[5]

1. Is the real meaning of the statement different from its literal meaning? Are words used in
senses not employed today? Is the statement meant to be ironic (i.e., mean other than it says)?

2. How well could the author observe the thing he reports? Were his senses equal to the
observation? Was his physical location suitable to sight, hearing, touch? Did he have the proper
social ability to observe: did he understand the language, have other expertise required (e.g.,
law, military); was he not being intimidated by his wife or the secret police?

3. How did the author report?, and what was his ability to do so?

1. Regarding his ability to report, was he biased? Did he have proper time for reporting?
Proper place for reporting? Adequate recording instruments?

2. When did he report in relation to his observation? Soon? Much later? Fifty years is
much later as most eyewitnesses are dead and those who remain may have forgotten
relevant material.

3. What was the author's intention in reporting? For whom did he report? Would that
audience be likely to require or suggest distortion to the author?

4. Are there additional clues to intended veracity? Was he indifferent on the subject
reported, thus probably not intending distortion? Did he make statements damaging to
himself, thus probably not seeking to distort? Did he give incidental or casual
information, almost certainly not intended to mislead?

4. Do his statements seem inherently improbable: e.g., contrary to human nature, or in conflict
with what we know?

5. Remember that some types of information are easier to observe and report on than others.

6. Are there inner contradictions in the document? Louis Gottschalk adds an additional
consideration: "Even when the fact in question may not be well-known, certain kinds of statements are
both incidental and probable to such a degree that error or falsehood seems unlikely. If an ancient
inscription on a road tells us that a certain proconsul built that road while Augustus was princeps, it may
be doubted without further corroboration that that proconsul really built the road, but would be harder
to doubt that the road was built during the principate of Augustus. If an advertisement informs readers
that 'A and B Coffee may be bought at any reliable grocer's at the unusual price of fifty cents a pound,'
all the inferences of the advertisement may well be doubted without corroboration except that there is
a brand of coffee on the market called 'A and B Coffee.'"[6]
Indirect witnesses

Garraghan says that most information comes from "indirect witnesses," people who were not
present on the scene but heard of the events from someone else.[7] Gottschalk says that a historian
may sometimes use hearsay evidence. He writes, "In cases where he uses secondary witnesses,
however, he does not rely upon them fully. On the contrary, he asks: (1) On whose primary testimony
does the secondary witness base his statements? (2) Did the secondary witness accurately report the
primary testimony as a whole? (3) If not, in what details did he accurately report the primary testimony?
Satisfactory answers to the second and third questions may provide the historian with the whole or the
gist of the primary testimony upon which the secondary witness may be his only means of knowledge. In
such cases the secondary source is the historian's 'original' source, in the sense of being the 'origin' of
his knowledge. Insofar as this 'original' source is an accurate report of primary testimony, he tests its
credibility as he would that of the primary testimony itself."[8]

Oral tradition

Gilbert Garraghan maintains that oral tradition may be accepted if it satisfies either two "broad
conditions" or six "particular conditions", as follows:[9]

1. Broad conditions stated.

1. The tradition should be supported by an unbroken series of witnesses, reaching from the
immediate and first reporter of the fact to the living mediate witness from whom we take it up,
or to the one who was the first to commit it to writing.

2. There should be several parallel and independent series of witnesses testifying to the fact in
question.

2. Particular conditions formulated.

1. The tradition must report a public event of importance, such as would necessarily be known
directly to a great number of persons.

2. The tradition must have been generally believed, at least for a definite period of time.

3. During that definite period it must have gone without protest, even from persons interested
in denying it.

4. The tradition must be one of relatively limited duration. [Elsewhere, Garraghan suggests a
maximum limit of 150 years, at least in cultures that excel in oral remembrance.]

5. The critical spirit must have been sufficiently developed while the tradition lasted, and the
necessary means of critical investigation must have been at hand.

6. Critical-minded persons who would surely have challenged the tradition — had they
considered it false — must have made no such challenge.

Other methods of verifying oral tradition may exist, such as comparison with the evidence of
archaeological remains.
More recent evidence concerning the potential reliability or unreliability of oral tradition has come out
of fieldwork in West Africa and Eastern Europe.

Synthesis: historical reasoning

Once individual pieces of information have been assessed in context, hypotheses can be formed and
established by historical reasoning.

Argument to the best explanation

C. Behan McCullagh lays down seven conditions for a successful argument to the best explanation:[11]

1. The statement, together with other statements already held to be true, must imply yet other
statements describing present, observable data. (We will henceforth call the first statement 'the
hypothesis', and the statements describing observable data, 'observation statements'.)

2. The hypothesis must be of greater explanatory scope than any other incompatible hypothesis
about the same subject; that is, it must imply a greater variety of observation statements.

3. The hypothesis must be of greater explanatory power than any other incompatible hypothesis
about the same subject; that is, it must make the observation statements it implies more
probable than any other.

4. The hypothesis must be more plausible than any other incompatible hypothesis about the
same subject; that is, it must be implied to some degree by a greater variety of accepted truths
than any other, and be implied more strongly than any other; and its probable negation must be
implied by fewer beliefs, and implied less strongly than any other.

5. The hypothesis must be less ad hoc than any other incompatible hypothesis about the same
subject; that is, it must include fewer new suppositions about the past which are not already
implied to some extent by existing beliefs.

6. It must be disconfirmed by fewer accepted beliefs than any other incompatible hypothesis
about the same subject; that is, when conjoined with accepted truths it must imply fewer
observation statements and other statementswhich are believed to be false.

7. It must exceed other incompatible hypotheses about the same subject by so much, in
characteristics 2 to 6, that there is little chance of an incompatible hypothesis, after further
investigation, soon exceeding it in these respects.

McCullagh sums up, "if the scope and strength of an explanation are very great, so that it explains a
large number and variety of facts, many more than any competing explanation, then it is likely to be
true."[12]
Statistical inference

McCullagh states this form of argument as follows:[13]

1. There is probability (of the degree p1) that whatever is an A is a B.

2. It is probable (to the degree p2) that this is an A.

3. Therefore (relative to these premises) it is probable (to the degree p1× p2) that this is a B.

McCullagh gives this example:[14]

1. In thousands of cases, the letters V.S.L.M. appearing at the end of a Latin inscription on a
tombstone stand for Votum Solvit Libens Merito.

2. From all appearances the letters V.S.L.M. are on this tombstone at the end of a Latin
inscription.

3. Therefore these letters on this tombstone stand for '’Votum Solvit Libens Merito’’.

This is a syllogism in probabilistic form, making use of a generalization formed by induction from
numerous examples (as the first premise).

Argument from analogy

The structure of the argument is as follows:[15]

1. One thing (object, event, or state of affairs) has properties p1. . . p n and p n + 1.

2. Another thing has properties p1 . . . p n

. 3. So the latter has property p n + 1.

McCullagh says that an argument from analogy, if sound, is either a "covert statistical syllogism" or
better expressed as an argument to the best explanation. It is a statistical syllogism when it is
"established by a sufficient number and variety of instances of the generalization"; otherwise, the
argument may be invalid because properties 1 through n are unrelated to property n + 1, unless
property n + 1 is the best explanation of properties 1 through n. Analogy, therefore, is uncontroversial
only when used to suggest hypotheses, not as a conclusive argument.
READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY (SOCSCI 1100)

❑ Philippine History viewed from various lens of selected primary sources (eyewitnesses’ accounts from
periods, analyses and interpretations

❑ Each students are expected to analyze selected readings contextually and in terms of content

❑ End goal is for students to understand and appreciate our rich past by deriving

insights from those who were actually present at the time of the event.

Primary Sources – are eye-witness’ accounts

Secondary Sources - accounts by individuals based on valid information from eyewitnesses

Primary Sources

➢Written – reports, correspondence, speeches, proceedings, memorials or any printable narratives,

blotter

➢Oral - derived from interviews

➢Cultural- preserved evidences of human cultures (artifacts)

Module II

❑ Contextual analysis and Content analysis of selected primary sources;

A. CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS:

➢ involved in the identification of the historical importance of the text;

➢ Search for the author’s background scholastic preparation, motives , authority on the subject,
published works

➢ Search Historical background of the document (When and Where it was published)

Module II

B. CONTENT ANALYSIS:

➢ Examine the author’s main argument or thesis

➢ Compare points of view

➢ Identify biases

➢ Evaluate author’s claims based on evidences presented at the time

Learning Outcome of Module II:

1.Identify credible and authentic primary sources that could be used in reconstructing and analysing the
history of the Filipino people from pre-colonial times to the present

2. Analyze the context, content, and perspective of selected primary sources and determine how they
affected the history of the Filipino people;

3.Develop critical and analytical skills as students are exposed to primary sources;

Things to do: Research for the

1. Background of the author

2. Historical background of the document

3. Content presentation and

4. Analysis of the important historical information found in the document

5. Contribution and relevance of the document in understanding the grand narrative of Phil.
history

6. Learning experiences
PHILIPPINE HISTORY: SPACES FOR CONFLICTS ( A Review and Refresher)

A. Lecture Notes

Overview of Philippine Pre-colonial History

The pre-colonial history of the Philippines dated back between 900 and 1565. And the earliest
known evidence for written literature in the history of the Philippines was the Laguna Copperplate
Inscription. The Laguna Copperplate Inscription is a sheet of copper metal with ancient writing
discovered in the province of Laguna in 1989. The inscription records its date of creation in the year 822
of the Hindu Saka calendar, corresponding to 900 AD in the Gregorian system. Therefore, the recovery
of this document marks the end of prehistory of the Philippines at 900 AD..

Sources of precolonial history include archeological findings, records from contact with the Sung
Dynasty, the Bruneian Empire, Korea, Japan, and Muslim traders, the genealogical records of Muslim
rulers, accounts written by Spanish chroniclers in the 16th and 17th century, and cultural patterns which
at the time had not yet been replaced through European influence.

Colonial Historiography

Philippine historiography has changed significantly since the 20th century. For a long time,
Spanish colonizers presented our history in two parts: a period of darkness or backwardness before they
arrived and a consequent period of advancement or enlightenment when they came. Spanish
chroniclers wrote a lot about the Philippines but their historical accounts emphasized the primacy of
colonization to liberate Filipinos from their backward “barbaric” life ways In the same manner, American
colonial writers also shared the same worldview of their predecessors by rationalizing their colonization
of Filipinos as a way to teach the natives of the “civilized lifestyle” which they said the Spaniards forgot
to impart including personal hygiene and public administration. Colonial narratives have portrayed
Filipinos as a people bereft of an advanced culture and a respectable history. This perception challenged
Filipino intellectuals beginning in the 1800s to rectify such cultural bias or prejudice. In 1890, Jose Rizal
came out with an annotation of Antonio de Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Events in the
Philippine Islands), a book originally published in 1609. He used de Morga’s book, a rare Spanish
publication that positively viewed precolonial Filipino culture, as a retort to the arrogant Spaniards.
However, cultural bias against Filipino culture continued even after Rizal’s death and the end of Spanish
colonialism

Political Narratives

Most of our national histories today favor narratives that deal with the political aspects of
nation-building such as the legacies of political leaders and establishment of different government.
Questions such as the following are focal points in these narratives. Who was the first Spanish governor-
general vital in implementing the encomienda policy? Who was the governor-general responsible for the
massive employment of Filipinos in the American colonial bureaucracy? Who served as the last
president of the Philippine Commonwealth and the inaugural chief executive of the Third Republic? Who
was the Philippine president responsible for the declaration of martial law? The challenge for present-
day historians is to present a more holistic history that goes beyond politics by means of integrating
other aspects of nation-building such as its economic and cultural aspects. Colonial Histories in Historical
Narratives Another weakness of most national histories is the importance given to colonial histories.
This continues to breed Filipinos who are more familiar with stories about our colonial history rather
than stories of our pre-colonial past. Up to now, some social studies textbooks misrepresent ancient
Filipinos as savages or barbarians by portraying colonizers, especially the Spaniards and American, as
liberators of the Filipinos from cultural backwardness. The key to uncover such cultural prejudices is to
examine available historical sources and to write about our past by understanding the myths and
misconceptions that characterized the Filipino culture for centuries.

Elite-centric Perspective in Historical Narratives

Some historical narratives focus on the contributions of the elite in nation-building such as what
the Illustrados (educated Filipinos) fought for in the 19th century or how the local politicians negotiated
with their American counterparts to obtain an independence law during the first half of

the 20th century.

Though eminent historians such as Constantino and Ileto reiterated the importance of a
“people’s history” and “history from below,” respectively, so much has to be done in terms of writing
about the roles played by ordinary people in our history. Patriarchal Orientation in Historical Narratives
Most of the country’s historical narratives highlight the heroism of men in different ways: leading revolts
and liberation wars against colonizers, championing the cause of independence, and spearheading
political and economic development. Women, on the other hand, are viewed by several historians as
merely support to men. Let us take for example the women leaders such as Gabriela Silang, Tandang
Sora, and Corazon Aquino. Silang assumed the leadership of the Ilocos revolt after her husband was
murdered in May 1763. Tandang Sora’s decision to offer her barn and farm to revolutionaries in August
1896 was linked to her son’s involvement in the Katipunan. Aquino rose to prominence as a martyr’s
widow who led a movement to depose a dictatorship in February 1986. These representations show
women’s roles as consequences of their connection to the men in their lives. With this bias in mind, it is
imperative for contemporary historians to use gender-sensitive approaches in understanding history to
avoid typecasting women as dependent, emotional, less important, passive, submissive, and weak.
Emphasis on Lowland Christianized Filipinos National histories tend to show partially toward lowland
Christianized Filipinos at the expense of other cultural communities such as Muslim Filipinos and other
indigenous peoples such as the Manobos of Mindanao, Ibalois of Cordillera, and Mangyans of Mindoro.
Celebrated figures of our past are all lowlander Christians and predominantly Tagalogs including Jose
Rizal, the leading propagandist; Andres Bonifacio, the Katipunan founder; Emilio Aguinaldo, the
revolutionary leader who declared independence; and Manuel Quezon, the first president of the
Philippine Commonwealth. Non-Christians and highlanders remain unrecognized in historical narratives.
Muslim Filipinos, in particular, have been subjected to negative characterization by lowland Christians in
published works such as history books. This is caused by the culture of mistrust that developed between
Christians and Muslims during the colonial periods. Muslim Filipinos are depicted as brutal, cruel,
ferocious, and vicious as exemplified by their attacks of Christian towns. This narrow-minded view has to
be reevaluated in order to correct misrepresentations of Muslim Filipinos in this age of political
correctness and cultural sensitivity. Because of the need to reassess our national histories, many local
stories- narratives about origins and development of a barangay, town, city, province, or an
ethnolinguistic community – have been written in the last three decades. The writing of these stories
broadens the scope of our national history reflective of the roles played by the country’s cultural
communities in nation – building. ( Source: Gonzalez, M C, Madrigal, C., San Juan, DM, Ramos, DJ (2014).
Chronicles in a changing world: Witnesses to the history of the Filipino people. Santillan, NM (Chapter):
Diwa Learning Systems Inc: Innovation in Education, Makati )
ANG KRONOLOHIYA SA PAGKABUO NG PILIPINAS

Summary of Dr. Raymundo Punong-Bayan’s Genesis of the Philippines, Environmental Center of the
Philippines FoundationvAtlas of the Philippines, Quezon City, 1998

Taong Sakop Panahong Heolohika Kaganapan

65 milyong taon (B.C.) Huling Cretaceous Ang islang-arko ng BIKOL, LEYTE, at SILANGANG
MINDANO ay nabuo matapos na lumubog ang
Philippine Sea Plate sa ilalim ng Indian-Austra;ian
Plate. Sila ang mga unang elemento ng arkipelago ng
Pilipinas.
57-37 milyong taon Eocene Mula sa ekwator, kasabay ng pagkilos ng Pacific
bago Plate, ang islang- arkong nabanggit ay “ naanod”
ngayon patungo sa pahilagang-kanlurang direksyon. Sa
panahong ito, nahati ang Pilipinas sa tatlong
magkakahiwalay na islang-arko: Arkong Luzon
( Sierra Madre at Samar), ang Arkong Halmahera
( bahagi na ngayon ng Indonesya) kung saan
nakadugtong ang Silangan at Sentral Kordilyera ng
Mindanao, at ang Arkong Sangihe, kung saan
matatagpuan ang Tangway ng Zamboanga at ang
Talampas ng Kudarat.
37-23 milyong taon Gitnang Oligocene Paglawak ng Dagat Timog Tsina dulot ng ekspansyon
Bago Ngayon ng seafloor sa pagitan ng Eurasian Plate at Micro-
continental Block.
23-6 milyong taon Maagang Miocene Paglawak ng seafloor na matatagpuan sa Dagat Sulu.
Bago Ngayon
Gitnang Miocene Bumangga ang Micro-continental Block ng Palawan
sa orihinal na islang arko (Luzon) ng Pilipinas.
Nagdulot ito ng bulkanismo sa Arkong Sulu.
6 milyong taon Bago Huling Miocene Tumigil ang bulkanismo sa Arkong Sulu, ngunit
Ngayon patuloy pa rin ang pagkilos ng Pacific at Philippine
plates. Bumangga ang hilangang bahagi ng Manila
Trench sa Taiwan, na nagdulot ng paglitaw ng mga
mababang bahagi ( kapatagan) ng Luzon mula sa
karagatan.
6-2 milyong taon Bago Huling Miocene Umabot ang Manila Trench hanggang Kanlurang
Ngayon hanggang simula ng Mindanao. Naputol at naging Negros at Cotabato
Pleistocene nang dumikit na ang bloke ng Mindoro-Palawan at
ang Tangway ng Zamboanga sa orihinal na islang
arko (Luzon) ng Pilipinas. Sa panahong ito, nagsimula
na ring lumubog ang Silangang bahagi ng bansa sa
erya ng Philippine Trench. Ito na ang simula ng
pagkakabuo ng lupang Pilipinas sa kanyang
kasalukuyang lokasyon, porma, hugis at anyo.
PRE-HISTORY

Theories on the Beginnings of the Philippines

Two classical theories had shed light on the geologic and geographic background of the
Philippines. These are:

 The Land bridge Theory theorized by Henry Otley Beyer, that over one million years ago during
the Pleistocene or Ice Age, the Philippines was connected to mainland China through a vast land area
called land-bridges.

 Volcanic Theory offered by Dr. Fritjoff Voss, a German geologist disputed Beyer’s Land Bridge
theory. He said that the Philippines was never part of the Asia mainland. He pointed out through
scientific studies made between 1964-67 on the thickness of the earth’s crust. It was found out that the
35-kilometer thick crust underneath China do not extend to the Philippines. Dr. Voss’s theory eventually
generated further studies which includes that of Dr. Raymundo PunongBayan. Part of his findings is
presented in a schema on next page shedding some light on the geological beginnings of the Philippine
archipelago.

The Historical Schema for Pre-History

This schema gives us a bird’ eye but holistic view of the continuing evolution of Philippine
society from prehistoric era to contemporary period. For us in history, we must look beyonf what the
national papers say by looking into a matrix of structures that could be used by us in arranging,
classifying and interpreting information in a scientific way. This schema tell us tht the ensuing changes
that transpire within the different structures and institutions in our society cannot be taken apart from
the changes that transpire within our physical environment.
SUGGESTED SCHEMA FOR PHILIPPINE PRE-HISTORY

( Source: Jaime B. Veneracion. AGOS NG DUGONG KAYUMANGGI:Isang Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas)

Era Period Technical Characteristics Political Economy Material Essence

Description Forms Culture
Pre- Beginnin Pleistocene Formation of Groups “Foraging for Stone tools Development
Austronesian g archipelago (Nuclear Food“ ( crude ) Of Man & his
250, 000 Glaciation Family) “ Hunting & Culture
BC Gathering“
Interaction of
Man and
Nature
250, 000 Paleolithic Homonization
BC
to 9000
BC
Austronesian 9000 BC Neolithic Spread of Clan of Domestication Flake Chinese &
to Austronesian Extended of plants & Tradition Indian
1500 BC tradition Family animals Influence
Slash & Burn
Agriculture Continuing
struggle of
Man &
Nature
1500 BC Metal Age Particularization Fishing , Pottery Emergence of
to & Separation Commerce Basketry permanent
200 AD from Dry / Wet Bead, Glass settlements
Austronesian Rice and Metals
Tradition Agriculture Man vs Man

Interaction
between clan
and tradition
Proto- 200 AD Proto- Emergence of Ethnic Expanded Same as Regional
Filipino to History Regional Forms groups & commerce above particularilizat
1565 AD in SEA ethnic ion
state ( SEA)
Filipino 1565 to History Emergence of National Agricultural Technology Man vs Man
present Philippine community industry ( plow with (struggle vs
forms from & ( export- crop wedge & colonialism )
ethnic Nation - oriented ) Harrow )
beginning into States ( market Machinery Struggle for
national economy ) Democracy
community
Struggle ofr
Nationalism
Unit III ANCIENT PHILIPPINE SOCIETY

Concepts:

The period prior to the colonization is the longest in our history covering prehistoric to pre-

Hispanic or pre-colonial stages ( 2 million AD to mid-16th century).

Solid evidences attesting to the existence of early civilizations of the Philippines dated back in

Pleistocene era. Presentation of the suggested schema for Philippine Pre-history may help deepen
discussion on this certain period.

The indigenous communities in the Philippines prior to Spanish colonization were viewed and

described by early Spanish chroniclers as uncivilized, a gross misconception that Robert Fox and other

progressive Filipino historians had wanted to rectify.

The succeeding discussion will focus on the characterization of these early societies that evolved
in the Philippines several years before the Spanish conquest.

A. General Information:

Precolonial population was less than 1 million from the lowland people from Luzon and
Viasayas. This population figure excluded the upland and Muslim populations. The population of the
Philippine island at the onset of Spanish rule was estimated to at about 750,000 headcounts. This was
based from the 1591 census of tributes ordered by Governor General Gomez Perez Dasmariñas.
(Constantino,1998, p.29 )

The barangay was the simplest social unit and was more of kinship groupings rather than
political units. Each one was a separate entity with only informal contacts with other villages. They vary
from sizes. The average village size was from 8-10 households (20-30 inhabitants. But there are also
extraordinary big barangays called as giant barangays with 2,000 or more inhabitants. Manilad (Manila),
Sugbu (Cebu), Maktan (Mactan), Bigan(Vigan), Butuan and Jolo. ( ibid, p.29)

Location:

Most communities were nucleated, aggregated but dispersed and were mostly found along
riverines, riverbanks, coastal or near coastal. Their proximity to the waters was because rivers as the
“rivers of life” are the rich source of their food and protein aside from being used as trading routes.
Therefore, contacts with domestic and foreign traders facilitated cultural change among people
inhabiting the coastal areas.

2 Ancient Settlement Patterns

1. SA-ILUD – communities found near the mouth of the river, is where most people lived. It was
overpopulated andwhere most advanced socio-political organizations were found. Three progressive
riparian settlements found along the mouth of the Pasig River were Sapa(“Sta.Mesa”), Maynilad
(Manila)and Tunduk (Tondo). Communities located in this type of settlement developed faster than the
Saraya.

2. SA-RAYA- inland, upriver and upland communities (Veneracion 1987, p.49-50)

Temporary Shelters and Dwellings

The customs and traditions of the people explained why mostly were temporary settlements.
For example , people had to abandon or burn their dwellings when a member of a family dies so as to
drive away evil spirits or the scent of death or bad-luck.

During also in pre-colonial era, structures made of stones were non- existent. Religion centered
on family or kin group. Each home was a temple on its own. Pre-Spanish settlements were an aggregate
Of independent households. Houses or dwellings were mostly made from light materials, are separate
and with no adjoining parts. Lower parts areenclosures made of stake bamboos, where poultry or
livestock were raised. Ladders are drawn up when one ascends the house. Houses were also built on
treetops to be safe from wild animals or enemy attacks. The Mandayans, Bagobo sand Kalingas were
well known as tree-dwellers. Others were made in boats for sea-rovers whose lives depended on the
wealth of the sea. ( KASAYSAYAN, 2000, vol.2)

Moreover, early Filipino houses were constructed without nails or pegs. They were just tied
together with a rattan. Afong Fa-yu– one of the Igorot’s (Bontocs) largest open board dwellings 3 1⁄2 –
4ft. high with a tall, heavy roofing. It is reserved only for highly respected elders. The torogan among the
Muslim societies particularly the Maranaos was a symbol of power. It was where the datu live. They
were with brightly painted wood carvings or okkil which emphasized religiosity and hierarchical
significance. The ulog in Bontoc Central, is a place for“trial marriage “or “trial mating” because
procreation was main function of marriage. Physically, it is a low stone-walled cogon thatched house in
which the unmarried girls of the village sleep at night. The Ato was combination bachelor’s dormitory
and council house for village elders. ( KASAYSAYAN, 2000) Transporation: horses and carabaos have
been used since the earliest times for pack and riding animals. Male horses were called “bait kota” while
mares were called “mamat koda.” Moreover, people traveled principally by water. No roads bisected
the countryside nor were there any wheeled vehicles. Trails followed the streams. ( KASAYSAYAN, 2000)

Political Life

Barangay was the social and political unit of the Filipinos before the coming of the Spaniards. It comes
from the Malay word balangay which mean boat. The barangays were generally small with thirty to one
hundred houses and their population varied from one hundred to five hundred persons.
(Constantino,1998,p.29 )

Flourishing trade and the spread of Islam paved the way for the evolution of independent and
self-sufficient baranganic societies.
Most of the members of the barangay were related to one another by blood or by marriage.
Besides kinship, common economic interests and shared rituals formed the bases for community
cohesion. The barangay was a social rather than a political unit, each one a separate entity with only
informal contacts with other villages.

Each barangay is independent from each other often headed by a chieftain for non-Muslim
groups or by a king called datu among muslim societies or principalities. For bigger confederation of
barangays, the rajah is the designated head among principalities. This proves that the early Filipinos
already had the idea of organizing themselves into bigger political body which was invariably a step to
nation-building. But there were factors which delayed them from uniting mainly due to the topography
of the archipelago or geographical make-up and language barriers.

The powers of datu or raja ranged from being the implementor of laws in the barangay,as the
supreme commander in times of war and as the legislator or lawmaker The primary duty of datu or raja
is to rule and govern his subjects and to promote their welfare and interests. As adjudicator of law, the
pre-colonial barangay system adheres to due process of law, that is giving equal opportunity to the
accused and to the victim and their respective witnesses to be heard and after that, the datu upon
consultation to the Council of Elders handed down his verdict in favour or against the accused. The
penalty depends on the gravity of crime committed, ranging from severe lashes or beatings to death by
drowning. (Veneracion,1997,p.60-62)

Another way of determining the guilt of an accused that applies in the pre-colonial criminal
justice system is the so-called trial by ordeal. It is in this context that the datu as the chief adjudicator
believes that God in His supreme wisdom will not allow an innocent person to suffer. The accused will
be tested in any of the following scheme:

1. The datu will order the suspects to place a stone in a vessel with boiling water and compelling
them to dip their hands into the vessel to take out the stone. The suspect who refused to obey the
command will be regarded as the culprit. If the suspects made the attempt as ordered, the man whose
hand was scalded the most will be considered guilty.

2. The suspects will be given lighted candles and the man whose lighted candles died out first
will be regarded as guilty.

3. The suspects will be ordered to plunge into the river or lake with lances. He who came to the

surface first will be considered guilty.

4. The suspects will be ordered to chew uncooked rice. Each of them will spat his saliva and the

one whose saliva came out the thickest will be adjudged as the culprit.

Economic Life

Precolonial baranganic communities were in the main primitive economic units with a system of
subsistence agriculture having barely enough for their needs. Therefore, all inhabitants are subsistence
farmers. Most barangays were established in the river, coastal or near coastal. This was because the
principal sources of protein came from the seas and rivers, the people relying more on fishing than on
hunting for sustenance.

Agriculture was the main source of livelihood and there was abundance of rice, coconuts,
sugarcanes and many other tropical crops. Land cultivation was done in two ways, kaingin and tillage.
Productivity was increased by the use of irrigation ditches such as the Ifugao terraces.

The autonomous barangay communities that Spaniards encountered were in the main primitive
economic units with a system of subsistence agriculture which provided them with barely enough for
their needs. Proof of this is that Legazpi himself had to move his main camp repeatedly from Cebu to
Panay to Luzon for the simple reason that there was not enough to eat

Concepts of property

Barangay system had one distinguishing feature: the absence of absolute private ownership of
land. The datus merely administered the lands in the name of the barangay. The social order was an
extension of the family with chiefs embodying the higher unity of the community. Each individual
therefore, participated in the community ownership of the soil and the instruments of production as a
member of the barangay. (Constantino,1998,p.38)

Pre-Hispanic societies’ primitive economy was geared to the use of the producers and to the
fulfillment of kinship obligations. It is not the economy that geared to exchange and profit. The means of
production were decentralized and familial and therefore the relations of dependence were not created
within the system of production. (Constantino, 1998)

Socio-Cultural Life

At the onset of Spanish conquest, barangays were societies in transition moving from primitive
communal state to an Asiatic version of feudalism among the “principalities “ (Muslim) in the south. Of
the four class structures of unhispanized societies (Scott), the principalties or the Muslims in the south
had achieved the most advanced stage. However, social stratification was simply societal divisions of
labor and not rigid. Positions in pre-Spanish societies were not permanent positions of which even a
chieftain can be deposed if proven to not an effective ruler or leader. Similarly, the dependent
population with a gradiation of dependency were not similar to the European concept of “ chattel
slaves” (Constantino). The politically correct term to use in referring to this sector was debt peons.

Native society had differing social structures depending upontheir location, socio-political and
economic specializations. Social stratification was not rigid and was simply societal divisions of labor
among members of communities where social statuses are not permanent.

Pre-colonial cultural life was rich and diverse. Literacy was for practical use only thus the
absence of a separate group of literate class as an exploitative class. Written language believed to be of
Austronesian parent stock was just used for communication and for literary expression of moods.
(Constantino, 1998)
Culture of the Early Filipinos:

The culture of one’s nation is always categorized in two aspects: first is the material or simply
cultures that existed and hence can be observed and are part of everyday life. The other one is non-
material culture in which its existence is not measured by tangible things. They existed and followed by
the people because they know that these two kinds of cultures are beneficial to them.

 Clothing: Among early Filipinos, clothes worn by the male sectors are different from that worn
by females. The upper part of men’s clothing was called as kangan, a sleeveless jacket usually made of
animal’s skin and in different colors like blue, black or red. Their lower part was known as bahag, a piece
of cloth wrapped around to their waist in which two legs were exposed. They had also a headgear called
putong that are indication of good stature if one was wearing an embroidered that means heroism
because of having killed seven enemies already.

Women worn baro or camisa for the upper part and saya in lower part. This saya was patadyong

among Visayan women. They had also tapis, a piece of cloth which was wrapped around to their saya or
patadyong.

 Housing: The early Filipinos tend to live in a far flung or separate ways, but when the
knowledge of having shelters were started, they built their own houses. Among Tagalogs, their houses
were like a bahay kubo in our today’s time. Hanged within four pillars or arigue leaving the lower
portion as shelter for their livestocks or any domesticated animals. It has also little decorations called
bahandin. Parts of their houses hadbatalanes and banggerahan where they can do some washing and
other chores.

For those early Filipinos living near the seas or rivers built their houses on boats. They were the
sea gypsies people. In some parts of Mindanao, natives there built their houses on tree tops for
protection from the enemies and wild animals.( KASAYSAYAN, 2000)

 Religion: Categorically, religion of early Filipinos can be in line with paganism and animism
because they worshipped nature and diwatas. The roles of native priests and priestesses called babaylan
or katalonans were to drive away sickness in the villages and to give spiritual needs of the people. If
there were unexplained things, they were the one consulted by the people. However, people believed in
highest deity called Bathala with sub deities to pray upon when needed. Some of these local deities are
as follows,to wit:

1. God of agriculture was Idiyenale

2. God of love-Diyan Masalanta

3. God of harvest-Lalahon

4. God of rainbow-Balangaw

5. God of fire-Agni

6. God of other world-Magwayen

7. God of war-Mandarangan

8. God of hell-Siginarugan

 Marriage Customs:

Among Tagalogs, marriage customs was following 3 steps. First was Paninilbihan in which the
groom to-be will perform different chores in the house of the bride to-be. Second was the settlement of
dowries with three categories: Panghimuyat and Himaraw comprised big amount of money to be given
to the parents of the bride, and Bigay-suso as reimbursement for the one served as wet nurse of the
bride during her infancy. The third step was Pamumulungan or Pamamalae which was the wedding
festival that lasted usually for seven days.

Among Muslims, they also followed three steps: First was the Panalanguni or Betrothal in which
the man and the group of tribesmen will pay visit to the girl’s house announcing their intention. Second
step was the settlement of dowries called Pedsungud composed of seven dowries, namely:

1. Kawasateg-money to be given to close relatives of the bride

2. Siwaka-payment to those who helped in arranging the wedding

3. Enduatuan-bribe for chieftain

4. Pangatulian-jewelries for bride’s mother and aunts

5. Tatas-blades for bride’s father and uncles

6. Langkad-payment for the bypassed sisters of the bride

7. Lekat-payment for the bride’s attendant

After the two steps, the wedding festival called Pegkawing will follow which also lasted for seven
days.( Agoncillo, 1990,p.36-38)
Pre-Spanish Philippine Societies

1. Coastal

2.Near coastal

3.Riverine in orientation

4.Mountains

5.Fields

6.Over the water

2 Ancient Settlement Patterns

SA-ILUD

◼ > Located at the mouth of the river

> overpopulated

◼ > had the most advanced socio-political organizations developed faster than the Saraya

SA-RAYA

◼ > are inland, upriver and upland communities

◼ > lagged behind Sa-ilud in

◼ terms of socio-political and economic development

Three progressive riparian settlements found along the mouth of the Pasig River Sapa ( “ Sta.Mesa” ),

Maynilad (Manila) and Tunduk (Tondo).

Pre-Spanish Demography (Population)

Precolonial population was less than 1M ( 750,000 based from 1591 Census ordered by Spanish
Gov-Gen. Gomez Perez Dasmariñas) from the lowland people from Luzon and Visayas.

This population figure excluded the upland and Muslim populations.

The average village size was from 8-10 households ( 20-30 inhabitants) But there were also
extraordinary big barangays called giant barangays with 2,000 or more inhabitants .
Ethnic Groups within the Coastal Areas

▪Itbayat(Batanes) ▪Ivatan (Batanes)

▪Ilokano ▪Kagayanen

▪Kalamianen ▪Agutaynen(Palawan)

▪Molbog (Palawan) ▪Jama Mapun (Palawan)

▪Kolibugan(Zamboanga) ▪Sama Dilaut(Bajao- Sulu,)

▪Sama Diliya Butuanon

▪Kamayo (Surigao) ▪Isamal Kalagan(Davao)

▪Manobo (SW Cotabato) ▪Sangir (Sarangani)

▪ Iranun(Wmindanao) ▪Bilaan

▪Bisaya ▪Sibuku(Sulu)

▪Sama Diliya

Ethnic Groups in the Highland Areas

•Tinguian •Kalinga

•Bontok •Ifugao

•Ibaloi •Sambal

•Apayao •Agta

•Kan •kankana-ey

•Isina •Ikalahan(Vizcaya,Pangasinan Ifugao)

•Iak •Ayta

•Mangyan •Sulod(Panay)

•Karolano •Magahat

•Batak •Pala’wan

•Subanon (Zamboanga) •Mamanwa (Samar,Sleyte,Surigao,Agusan)

•Mandaya •Mansaka(Davao del Norte

•Bagobo •Tirurai (Maguindano,S.Kudarat)

•T’Boli (South Cotabato)

DWELLING TYPES

Nipa Hut (bahay kubo)-a stucture used for sleeping and shelter and used things at their surrounding to
build it.

Tree houses- another dwelling place built higher off the ground & also used for protection against wild
animals and enemies

Afong- fa-yu- refuge for the retiring elderly Bontocs, located at the foot of the mountains

Afong- fa-yu- refuge for the retiring elderly Bontocs, located at the foot of the mountains

A one-room aerie 18- 20 ft. above the ground, dwelling for the Mandaya

Boat houses- another type of dwelling place but in water also used in mobilization and transport.

Bamboo ladder- used for climbing trees and houses

Samals Opt Dwelling

The Samals Opt Dwellingsse was built using bamboo for their walls and cogon for their roofs.

Agta of North Eastern Luzon

This mobile Agta of Northeastern Luzon live in huts made of sticks, grass or palm leaves.

Aerie Mandaya

Mandaya means "the people who live upriver". They belong to the Manobo group. A “bagani" (datu)
with his "Likid" (advisory council) heads the tribe. The "Christianized" portion of the Mandayas are
considered to be the original "Dabawenos".

Their house is a poorly constructed one-room hut.

Sagada House

Homes in sagada such as the Fa-yo are pen-like, with straw thatch roofs suspended on pillars.

The Fa-yo located at the slopes of the mountains are refuge for retiring elders among Bontocs.
Yakan House

The Yakans are probably the original inhabitants of Basilan, an island just off the southwestern point of
Mindanao. They live mostly in the central and southwestern mountainous interior.

Kalinga House

The Lumbuagan, mountain province, Kalinga homes are one room structures raised above the ground.

Maranao’s Torogan

It also called an ancestral home, features of traditional “panolong” and this was established with the
Okkil-Naga Motifs. Torogan was a symbol of power since it’s where the datu lives

Tausog House

The Tausug dwelling is a one-room structure of woven or split bamboo, with Nipa Roof.

Bontoc Dwelling

Agta-Palanan Dwellings

The Agta-Palanan dwelling, this was built by using a bamboo for the walls and cogon thatched roof.

Nomadic Negritos

The Nomadic Negritos, they live in a portable lean-to which was both roof and wall, suited the lifestyle
of the “Nomadic Negritos”

The I’wak , Cordillera Mountains

In Cordillera Mountain ranges the I’wak live in box-like windowless structures with cogon roofs.

Ancient Filipino Community

System of Mobilization or Mean of Transportation

Early Sea Vessel of Filipinos

PRE-COLONIAL POLITICAL SYSTEM

The barangay ( derived from the Malay word Balangay) was the socio-political unit of government that
consisted of 30 to 100 families –headed by a chieftain.

The diversity of barangay implies that there was no national or central government

The chieftain or datu was a very powerful functionary for he was vested with executive, legislative,
judicial, military.

Sultan -highest leader of Sultanato Government established by Sharif Abu Bakr in the year of 1450.

“Ruma Bichara” -a group of barangay leaders or adviser committee

composed of Datu who served as adviser to the Sultan.

POWER-SHARING: Council of elders (“magino-os”) were the adviser of the chieftain

Decision- making was not vested to one person alone but rather cumulative.

Judicial Process

Trials were held publicly and decisions were swift, thereby avoiding what is known as “justice delayed,
justice denied” .

All trials were conducted efficiently and without any delay.

Disputes are inevitable in any society but were usually decided peacefully through a “court” composed
of chieftain as “judge” and the council of elders as the “jury”.

Arbitration – Conflicts arising between subjects of different barangays composed of elders from neutral
barangays acted as “arbiter”.

Disputes are settled through trial by ordeal – to ensure a fair and consistent application of due process
to all cases that come before a court.
JUDICIAL PROCESS

River ordeal, suspects Boiling water ordeal, suspects Candle ordeal, suspects are
plunge into the river with pick a stone in a pot of boiling given lighted candles of the
spears and who rises first is water and he whose arm or same sizes and the owner of the
guilty hand is burned the most is candle that died out first is
guilty. guilty.

Ancient Laws

Laws were either customary or written .

Customary laws were handed down orally from generation to generation and constituted the bulk of the
laws of the barangay.

Written laws were promulgated. Only a few of written laws, among them the so- called Code of
Kalantiyaw (disputed and controversial) and the Muslim laws (Code of Luwaran, Adat, Shaira and Koran).

The Maragtas Code issued by Datu Sumakwel of Panay Island and the Code of Kalantiao issued by Datu
Kalantiano of Negros in 1433 were now questioned by historians

Law-making process:

The chieftain or datu-drafts the law while the council of elders approved them.

Written laws were announced to the people by a barangay crier known as “umalahokan”.

Article I

You shall not kill, neither shall you steal, neither shall you do harm to the aged, lest you incur the danger
of death. All those who infringe this order shall be condemned to death by being drowned in the river,
or in boiling water.

Article II

You shall obey. Let all your debts with the headman be met punctually. He who does not obey shall
receive for the first time one hundred lashes. If the debt is large, he shall be condemned to thrust his
hand in boiling water thrice. For the second time, he shall be beaten to death.
Article VII

These shall be put to death; he who kills trees of venerable appearance; who shoot arrows at night at
old men and women; he who enters the houses of the headmen without permission; he who kills a
shark or a streaked cayman.

Article VIII

Slavery for a doam (a certain period of time) shall be suffered by those who steal away the women of
the headmen; by him who keep ill-tempered dogs that bite the headmen; by him who burns the fields of
another.

Spanish Colonial System

It took 44 years after Magellan’s arrival and another five expeditions before Miguel de Legazpi had
successfully conquered the island.

Under a policy of divide and rule strategy, hidden contradictions of ancient barangays were
made to surface and created conflicts among the natives.

And as such the Spaniards were able to employ concentrated force anywhere in the Philippines.

Motives

Economic Reasons

- primordial stimulus (new trade routes, gold, spices/raw materials)

Political (expansion of Spanish empire)

Religious (extend Catholic religion)

Basic instruments of pacification considered also as early policies were enforced by the Spanish
colonizers.

Divide and conquer

Christianization

Reduccion
Reduccion – resettlement of scattered villages into one compacted community called as “ plaza
complex” or poblacion-sitio-barrio complex

- was designed by Fr. Juan De Plasencia

- for tax collection, proselytization and to weaken the datu or chieftain’s influence

Other succeeding economic policies implemented used as instruments of pacification were:

Encomienda system

Tribute

Forced Labor

Bandala

Other Instruments of Pacification

Encomienda - not a land-grant but just an administrative unit for tax collection

Limitations placed by King of Spain on the Encomiendero

Limited the amount of land placed under the jurisdiction of the encomiendero

Not hereditary beyond 3rd and 4 th generations.

Land reverted back to the Crown when the encomendero dies.

Prohibited draft labor.

Abuses of Encomenderos

forced Filipinos to pay tributes beyond amount required of them by law

they created a crisis even in times of good harvest lowering the prices of commodities and
forcing the natives to pay in cash.

They controlled the commerce of the area under this jurisdiction by selling the goods at ceiling
prices.

Other Instruments of Pacification

Tribute System

- tax levied on all Pinoys 19-60 years old.

Abuses of Tribute Collectors

Collected more than what the law required

Those who could not pay tribute were either tortured or imprisoned.

The tribute could paid in cash or in kind.

Other Instruments of Pacification

Bandala

- Assignments of annual quotas each province for the compulsory sale of products to the government.

-means virtual confiscation

BANDALA SYSTEM

Filipinos were required/forced to sell their agricultural harvest to the government.

Problem/Abuses

Products were not paid by the government

Government prices were lower than the prevailing prices

If the crops were destroyed, farmers bought at higher prices from the others only to sell this product to
the governments on loan or lower prices.

Other Instruments of Pacification

FORCED LABOR or POLO Y SERVICIOS -men between the ages of 16-60 except the chieftains and eldest
sons were required to serve for 40 days a year in the labor pool .

POLISTA- obligated to give personal service to community projects like construction / infrastructures on
roads, bridges, churches, repair of Galleons

- can be exempted if he pays the falla

REGULATIONS:

Payment of ¼ real a day plus rice ration to each polista

Polistas are not supposed to be brought to a distant place nor required to work during planting and
harvesting

Private enterprises and non-military public works were prohibited from using polo labor

Not to use polistas if Chinese volunteers are available in the area

ABUSES ON FORCED LABOR:

Polistas nevers received their daily wages, rice rations

They were compelled to cut logs in the forests and dragged them to shipyards

They were forcibly taken away to work in the shipyards and served in the Spanish expedition during
plantib

LATER POLICIES & IMPACT OF SPANISH COLONIZATION

16th-17th Centuries 18th-19th Centuries

A. POLITICAL CHANGES as is ( no change )
Institution of the Union of the church and State
B. ECONOMIC CHANGES Open Door Policy Factors:
Closed Door policy Opening of Suez Canal
* Galleon Trade End of Galleon Trade Laissez Faire
* Tobacco
Monopoly til 1872
C. SOCIO-CULTURAL CHANGES emergence of a new principalia class 🡪 ilustrado
accreleration of the social stratification education class spread of liberal ideas
was confined to elite

A SOCIO-CULTURAL CHANGES Education reforms

No one language policy education confined to the elite only
New customs, practices & institutions
B. SOCIO-CULTURAL CHANGES Shift in the pattern of resistance against
Education limited to the principales Spanish rule ( early revolts🡪 1896 revolution )
Domestication and subjugation of Filipino women
Secularization and Filipinization
C. SOCIO-CULTURAL CHANGES As is
Changing of Filipinos’ native names into Castillian
names for tax collection

Effects of Open Door Policy ( Liberalization of the Economic Policies )

Opening of Phil ports to international trade

Partial relaxation of trade laws

Export cash crops

Regionalization of crops

Rise of haciendas & banks

Development of infrastructures, telecom, transportations & public utilities

REVOLTS AGAINST THE SPANISH REGIME 1521-1898

EARLY REVOLTS

were mostly peasant movements that were regarded as nativistic, messianic and irrational incidents
that come and go

NATIVISTIC- movements which emphasized the elimination of alien persons, customs & values

 MESSIANIC - a savior in human flesh is involved

were mostly Revitalization movements ( movements with deliberate efforts to construct a more
satisfying culture )

were immediate reactions against the differentaspects of colonialism ( anti-tribute, anti-polo, anti- friar,
anti-bandala etc..)

were pocket resistance that burst into national struggle

Specific Causes

 were immediate reactions to Spanish impositions and policies

 ( anti-tribute, anti-polo,anti-friar, anti- bandala etc..)

were resistance against Catholicism, manifested the Filipinos’ desire to go back to their old religious
practices and beliefs (aposthesism)

were Filipinos’ expression of their refusal to be dragged into the wars not theirs

( Spain into war against the Dutch, Portuguese and British)

5 BATCHES 0f Early Revolts

1st – 1565-1663

2nd- 1663-1765
3rd –1765-1815

4th - 1815-1872

5th - 1872-1896

FIRST BATCH (1565-1663 )

1674 = Revolt of Lakandula

1584 –Pampanga Revolt

1589- Tondo Conspiracy

1621 – Bohol Rebellion

1622- Zambales Revolt

1649-1650-Sumuroy Rebellion

1660- Maniago Revolt ( Pampanga )

1660-61 – Malong Revolt (Pangasinan )

1663- Tapar Uprising ( Panay )

Were mostly immediate reactions to the different colonial policies

SECOND BATCH (1663-1765 )

1718 - Cagayan Revolt

1745-1762 –Agrarian Revolts in the Tagalog Regions vs landgrabbing

1762-63 SILANG Revolt (Ilocos )

172-1764- PALARIS Revolt (Pangasinan )

1744-1825 – DAGOHOY revolt (Bohol)

•Were mostly rural-based ( Agrarian unrest)

•Were longer in duration

THIRD BATCH (1765-1815 )

•showed manifestations of a growing nationalism ( anti-foreign )

1785 –Revolt in Cagayan

1807 –BASI Revolt (Ilocos)

1811 –LUNGAO Revolt(Southern Ilocos)- continuing DAGOHOY (Bohol)

FOURTH BATCH ( 1815-1872 )

• Period characterized by the emergence of a counter- consciousness and a developing national identity

1820-23—Rebellion in Manila

1828 –PALMERO brothers rebellion

1840-41 –Tayabas Revolt by HERMANO PULE

1843 –SAMANIEGO Revolt (Manila )

1844- Negros Revolt

1863- BALADON & LABUTAWI Rebellion (Isabela)

1872- CAVITE MUTINY

FIFTH BATCH (1872 -1896 )

 Uprising during this period merged with the initiatives of the urban middle class, eventually saw the
outbreak of the Revolution

Examples:

 1872 (Cavite) – CAVITE Mutiny by Sgt.La Madrid

 1886-1889 (Negros) –DIOS NA BUHAWI (Anti- cacique)

 1887-1917 (Negros) –BABAYLANES-PULAHANES (anti-foreign)

The Birth and Development of Filipino Nationalism ( Nationalism and the Reform /Propaganda
Movements )

According to Teodoro Agoncillo, love of one’s country is the most important requisite for the formation
of national consciousness.

Causes of Nationalism

The Influx of Liberal Ideas

• Reform, justice, politics and liberty

• The Opening of the Philippines to World Commerce

 Several ports were opened in the Philippines that stimulated the economic activities in the country.

• Revolution against Queen Isabel II

• Religious issue between Spanish friars and Filipino priests.

(secularization reforms mvts &kkk)

Rise of the Middle Class

 Ilustrado and principalia

 Discussed political problems and reforms

Cavite Mutiny

• protest in abolition in paying the annual tribute

REFORM MOVEMENTS

The Death of Gomburza & The Propaganda Movement

• The death of Gomburza in February 17, 1872 awakened strong feelings of anger and resentment
among the Filipinos.

• Fr. Gomez, Burgos and Zamora were all Filipino priests who were executed by the Spanish colonizers
on charges of subversion.
The martyrdom of the three priests apparently helped to inspire the organization of the Propaganda or
Reform Movement, which aimed to seek reforms and inform Spain of the abuses of its colonial
government.

WHO WERE THESE REFORMISTS WHO COMPRISED THE PROPAGANDA OR REFORM MOVEMENTS ?

 Were the ilustrados that led the Filipinos’ quest for reforms

 Because of their education and newly acquired wealth, they felt more confident about voicing out
popular grievances

However, since the ilustrados themselves were a result of the changes that the Spanish government had
been slowly implementing, the group could not really push very hard for the reforms it wanted.

MEMBERS AND CLASS ORIENTATION OF REFORM MOVEMENTS:

 came mostly from the upper-middle class (elites or ilustrados )

3 groups:

 The first included Filipinos who had been exiled to the Marianas Islands in 1872 after being implicated
in the Cavite Mutiny.

The second group consisted of ilustrados in the Philippines who had been sent to Europe for their
education.

The third group was composed of Filipinos who had fled their country to avoid punishment for a crime,
or simply because they could not stand Spanish atrocities any longer.

Marcelo del Pilar – who was active in the anti-friar movement. He fled to Spain in 1888 and became
editor of la solidaridad

EXAMPLES OF PROPAGANDA/REFORM MOVEMENTS:

EL ECO FILIPINO

EL CIRCULO-HISPANO FILIPINO

ASOSACION HISPANO FILIPINO

LA SOLIDARIDAD (lasted 5 yrs.)

MASONIC LODGES (e.g. Nilad,Walana)

LA LIGA FILIPINA (organized in the Phil.)

GOALS / OBJECTIVES

1. Equality of Filipinos and Spaniards before the law.

2. Assimilation of the Philippines as regular province of Spain.
3. Representation of Filipinos to Spanish Cortes or Spanish Parliament.
4. Filipinization or secularization of the Philippine Parishes.
5. Individual Liberties for Filipinos such as freedom of the press, speech, and to meet the petition
for redress of grievances

Strategy of Struggle

The Reform or Propaganda Movements never asked for Philippine independence because
itsmembers believed that once Spain realized the pitiful state of the country, the Spaniards would
implement the changes the Filipinos were seeking.

But then, the propaganda movement was a failure

REASONS WHY REFORM MOVEMENTS FAILED:

-The mother country was pre- occupied by its internal problems.

-The colonial government did not agree to any of its demands.

-The friars were too powerful

-They still failed to maintain a united front. Because most of them belonged to the upper middle class,
they had to exercise caution in order to safeguard their wealth and other private interests.

-Lack of funds

-Petty jealousies among the reformists.

-Lastly, no other strong and charismatic leader emerged from the group aside from Jose Rizal.

PAGKAKAHATI NG LA LIGA FILIPINA

` LA LIGA FILIPINA

CUERPO DE COMPROMISARIOS KATIPUNAN

PAGHINGI NG REPORMA SA MAPAYAPANG PARAAN PAGLUNGSAD NG REBOLUSYON LABAN

SA MGA ESPANOL

With the failure of the Propaganda Movement, The Filipinos gave up the last ditch of hope to peaceful
means. Andres Bonifacio led the Filipinos to a new phase of social and political awareness marked by the
founding of Katipunan.
The Katipunan Finally Starts a Revolution

The Katipunan is born

 Andres Bonifacio was also a member of La Liga Filipina, although he soon lost hope in gaining reforms
though peaceful means.

This feeling was especially heightened when Jose Rizal was exiled to Dapitan.

 Bonifacio became convinced that the only way the Philippines could gain independence was through a
revolution.

Bonifacio then founded the “Katastaasang Kagalanggalangang Katipuanan ng mga Anak ng Bayan” (KKK)
on July 7, 1892 in a house on Azcarraga street (now Claro M. Recto), in Tondo Manila.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF KATIPUNAN

WHO WERE THE MEMBERS OF THE KATIPUNAN ? (CLASS ORIENTATION)

Were mostly from the basic sectors ( lower-middle class )

 Petty bourgoisie class

 Small shop owners, government employees

TheLeaders of the Katipunan:

 Deodato Arellano -Supremo

▪ Ladislao Diwa -Fiscal

▪ Teodora Plata -Secretary

▪ Valentine Diaz -treasurer

▪ Andres Bonifacio -controller

First Stage of the Initiation rites

The applicant’s tenacity or determination is tested via an initiation rites or “pagsubok” by blindfolding
the applicant and make him / her believe that he or she has to walk over a fire.

Second stage of the Initiation Rites : Interrogation

The applicant has to answer satisfyingly these three questions:

1.What was the condition of this country in the early times ?

1.What is the condition of this country in the present times ?

1.What will it be in the near future?

Third phase of the initiation rites : SANDUGUAN

TATLONG ANTAS NG KATIPUNAN

HUDYAT

BAYANI RIZAL

KAWAL GOMBURZA

KATIPON ANAK NG BAYAN

Newspaper of KKK : KALAYAAN

1896 REVOLUTION & FORCES OF COMPROMISE

Betrayal of the Katipunan

August 1896, the Katipunan was betrayed by one of its members: Teodoro Patiño ,a worker from Diario
De Manila had a misunderstanding with a fellow Katipunero, Apolonio dela Cruz.

Patiño let out Katipunan’s secrecy to his sister Honoria who was an inmate at an orphanage run by the
Augustinian nuns.

Patiño was advised by a nun, Sor Theresa to confess all he knew to Fr. Mariano Gil.

• Fr. Mariano Gil led the raid to the printing press.

Untimely declaration of war

Succeeding incidents will lead to the untimely declaration of war against the Spanish oppression
formalized by the tearing of the cedulas in Pugadlawin, August 23, 1896.

San Juan Del Monte – scene of the first battles to be staged in by the Katipuneros against the Spaniards.

Declaration of Martial Law

Gov. Gen. Ramon Blanco declared Martial Law in 8 provinces in Luzon to justify the arrest of suspected
Katipuneros

First eight provinces who struggled against Spanish Colonial rule

Reign of Terror

Mass arrest and executions were carried out all through out September where even the innocent were
not spared.

Revolution spreads

Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Apolonio Samson, Macario Sakay, Faustino Guillermo, and Lucino
Geromino set up camp in Mariquina-San Mateo mountains where new adherents joined them

The fire of revolution spread not only in Manila but in the adjoining provinces and regions of the
Philippines.
Noveleta, 1896

PICTURE

Spanish Forces at Silang, Cavite, 1897

PICTURE

Power Struggle within The Katipunan

Division within the ranks of Katipunan became evident in the early days of Katipunan.

Divisions in the Provincial Council of Katipunan in Cavite

Magdiwang-led by Mariano Alvarez based at Noveleta

Magdalo-led by Baldomero Aguinaldo based in Kawit

Cavitismo and the Ilustrado Syndrome

“ Cavitismo ” was a chauvinism that animated the temporary victorious Caviteños in the belief that the
revolution was only in Cavite and its leadership must therefore be a Caviteño.

Ilustrado Syndome

A typical ilustrado belief that leadership should be the exclusive right of the educated class and was
characterized by their compromising attitude and vacillitating tendencies ( of willing to fight but ready to
retreat if the price is right )

ilustrado syndome ...

• Is a fundamental factor underlying the power play within the Katipunan that will be strongly exhibited
at the Tejeros Convention

The successive losses of the Spanish forces in Cavite in the hands of the Katipunan headed by Emilio
Aguinaldo had made him a local hero of the hour.

Magdalo’s arrogance
Flushed with short-lived victory, Aguinaldo and the leaders of the Magdalo decided that the original

Katipunan be replaced and pre- empt the leadership of the Revolution.

Magdalo’s non-recognition of Bonifacio as Supremo

Emilio Aguinaldo & Edilberto Evangelista (Belgian –trained engineer) unauthorizedly released 2 prisoners
of wars which angered Bonifacio.

Tomas Mascardo & Cayetano Topacio were escorts of the prisoners whom Aguinaldo via Evangelista
issued unauthorized release order.

Second Manifestation of Caviteños ‘ arrogance

Bonifacio ordered the arrest of Vicente Fernandez who failed to keep his promise to attack the
Spaniards in Laguna and Morong simultaneously with Bonifacio’s assault in San Juan del Monte.

Magdalo leaders- Baldomero Aguinaldo and Daniel Tirona refused to surrender Fernandez.

The rivalry between the Magdalo and Magdiwang factions led to series of reverses.

To patch up matters, Mariano Alvarez (Magdiwang group) inivited and insisted that Bonifacio intervene
in the conflict despite the latter’s reservations.

THE ILUSTRADO INTERVENTION

IMUS ASSEMBLY (Dec 31, 1896)

- called to determine the leadership of the Cavite Province and resolve the rivalry between Magdalo and
Magdiwang

- never discussed the issue instead the Magdalo group insisted in pushing their hidden agenda of
replacing the Katipunan and called for an election

TEJEROS CONVENTION of March 22, 1897

(Anti-Bonifacio & Anti-Katipunan)

• Failed to resolve the issue of rivalry and adopt measures for Cavite’s defense