Module 1

Chapter 1: Introduction to History, Definition, Issues, Sources and Methodology

Learning Objectives:

 To understand the meaning of history as an academic discipline and to be familiar with

the underlying philosophy and methodology of the discipline.
 To apply the knowledge in historical methodology and philosophy in assessing and
analyzing existing historical narratives.
 To examine and assess critically the value of historical evidences and sources
 To appreciate the importance of history in the social and national life of the Philippines.

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

Definition and Subject Matter

History has always been known as the study of the past. Students of general education
often dread the subject for its known to require them to memorize dates, place, names and
events from distant eras. This low appreciation of the discipline maybe rooted from the shallow
understanding of history’s relevance to their lives and to their respective contexts. While the
popular definition of history as the study of the past is not wrong, it does not give justice to the
complexity of the subject and its importance to human civilization.
History was derived from the Greek word historia which means “knowledge acquired
through inquiry or investigation.”History as a discipline existed for around 2, 400 years and is as
old as mathematics and philosophy. This term was then adapted to classical Latin where it
acquired a new definition. Historia became known as the account of the past of a person or a
group of people through written documents and historical evidences. The meaning stuck until
the early parts of the 20 th century. History became as important academic discipline. It became
the historian’s duty to write about the lives of important individuals like monarchs, heroes,
saints and nobilities. History was also focused on writing wars, revolutions and other important
breakthroughs. It is thus important to ask: What counts as history? Traditional historians lived
with the mantra of “no document, no history.” It means that unless a written document can
prove a certain historical event, then it cannot be considered as historical fact.
But as any other academic disciplines, history progressed and opened up to the
possibility of valid historical sources, which were not limited to written documents, like
government records, chronicler’s accounts or personal letters. Giving premium to written
documents essentially invalidates the history of other civilizations that do not keep written
records. Some were keener on passing their history by word of mouth. Others got their
historical documents burned or destroyed in the events of war or colonization. Restricting
historical evidence as exclusively written is also discrimination against other social classes who
are not recorded in paper. Nobilities, monarchs, the elite, and even the middle class would have
their birth, education, marriage, and death as matters of government and historical record. But
what of peasant families or indigenous groups who were not given much thought about being
registered to government records? Does the absence of written documents about them mean
they were people of no history or past? Did they even exist?
This loophole was recognized by historians who started using other kinds of historical
sources, which may not be in written form but were just as valid. A few of these examples are
oral traditions in forms of epics and songs, artifacts, architecture and memory. History thus
became more inclusive and started collaborating with other disciplines as its auxiliary discipline.
With the aid of archaeologist, historians can use artifacts from a bygone era to study ancient
civilization that were formerly ignored in history because of lack of documents. Linguist can also
be helpful in tracing historical evolutions, past connections among different groups, and flow of
cultural influence by studying language and the changes that it has undergone. Even scientists
like biologist and biochemist can help with the study of the past through analyzing genetic and
NA patterns of human societies.

Questions and Issues in History

Indeed, history as a discipline has already turned into complex and dynamic inquiry. This
dynamism inevitably produced various perspectives on the discipline regarding different
questions like: What is history? Why study history? And history for whom? These questions can
be answered by historiography. In simple terms, historiography is the history of history. History
and historiography should not be confused with each other. The former’s object of the study is
the past, the events that happened in the past and the causes of such events. The latter’s
object of study, on the other hand is history itself (i.e. , How was certain historical text written?
Who wrote it? What was the context of its publication? What particular historical method was
employed? What were the sources?). Thus, historiography lets the students have better
understanding of history. They do not only get to learn historical facts, but they also provided
 with the understanding of the facts’ and historian’s contexts. The method employed by the
historian and the theory and perspective, which guided him, will be analyzed. Historiography is
important for someone who studies history because it teaches the student to be critical in the
lessons of history presented to him.
History has played various roles in the past. States used history to unite a nation. It can
be used as a tool to legitimize regimes and forge a sense of collective identity through collective
memory. Lessons from the past can be used to make sense of the present. Learning of past
mistakes can help people to not repeat them. Being reminded of a great past can inspire people
to keep their good practices to move forward.

Postcolonialism is a school of thought that emerged in the early 20 th century when formerly colonized nations
grappled with the idea of creating their identities and understanding their societies against the shadows of
their colonial past. Post colonial history looks at two things in writing history: first is to tell the history of their
nation that will highlight their identity free from the colonial discourse and knowledge, and the second is to
criticize the methods, effects, and idea of colonialism. Post colonial history is therefore a reaction and an
alternative to colonial history that colonial powers created and taught to their subjects.
As a narrative, any history that has been taught and written is always intended for
certain group of audience. When the ilustrados, like Jose Rizal, Isabelo delos Reyes, and Pedro
Paterno wrote history, they intended it for the Spaniards so they would realize that Filipinos are
people of their own intellect and culture. When the American historian depicted the Filipino
people as uncivilized in their publications, they intended that narrative for their fellow
Americans to justify their colonization of the islands. They wanted the colonization to appear
not as a means of undermining the Philippines sovereignty, but as a civilizing mission to fulfill
what they called as the “white man’s burden.” The same is true for nations which prescribed
official versions of their history like North Korea, the Nazi Germany during the war periods, and
Positivism is the school of thought that emerged between the 18th and 19th century. This thought
Thailand. The same were attempted by Marcos in the Philippines during the 1970’s.
requires empirical and observable evidence before one can claim that a particular knowledge is true.
Positivism also entails an objective means of arriving at a conclusion. In the discipline of history, the
mantra, “no document, no history” stems from this very same truth, where historians were required to
show written primary documents in order to write a particular historical narrative. Positivist historians are
also expected to be objective and impartial not just in their arguments but also on their conduct of
historical research.
 One of the problems confronted by history is the accusation that the history is always
written by the victors. This connotes the narrative of the past is always written from the bias of
the powerful and the more dominant player, For instance, the history of the Second World War
in the Philippines always depicts the United States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army
as the oppressors. Filipinos who collaborated with the Japanese were lumped in the category of
traitors or collaborators. However, a more thorough historical investigation will reveal a more
nuanced account of the history of that period instead of a simplified narrative as a story of hero
versus villain.

History and the Historian

If history is written with agenda or is heavily influenced by the historian, is it possible to
come up with an absolute historical truth? Is history an objective discipline? It is not, is it still
worthwhile to study history? These questions have haunted historians for many generations.
Indeed, an exact and accurate account of the past is impossible for the very simple reason that
we cannot go back to the past. We cannot access the past directly as our subject matter.
Historians can only get to access representation of the past through historical sources and
evidences.

Therefore, it is the historian’s job not just to seek historical evidences and facts nut also to
interpret these facts. “Facts cannot speak for themselves.” It is the job of the historian to give
meanings to these facts and organize them into timeline, establish causes, and write history.
Meanwhile, the historian is not a blank paper who mechanically interprets and analyzes present
historical fact. He is a person of his own who is influenced by his own context, environment,
Theideology,
Annahales education,
School ofand influences,
History among
is a school others. born
of history In that sense, that
in France his interpretation
challenged theofcanons
the of
historical
history. Thus fact is of
school affected
thoughtbydidhisaway
context
with and circumstances.
the common Hissubjects
historical subjectivity will inevitably
that were almost always
influence the process of his historical research: the methodology that he will
related to the conduct of the states and monarchs. Annahales scholars like Lucien Febvre, Marcuse, the facts thatBloch,
he willBraudel,
Fernand select andanddeem relevant,
Jacques his interpretation,
Le Goff studied otherand even the
subjects in form of his writings.
a historical manner.Thus,
Theyinwere
one waywith
concerned or another, historyand
social history is always subjective.
studied If that is periods.
longer historical so, can history still be considered
For example, Annahales asscholar
an academic and scientific inquiry?
studied the history of peasantry, the history of medicine, or even the history of environment. The
history from below isresearch
Historical pioneered by therigor.
require sameDespite
scholars.
theThey
factadvocated that the people
that the historians cannotand the classes
ascertain
whoabsolute
were not reflected in
objectivity, thethe history
study of the society
of history remainsinscientific
the grandbecause
mannerofbethe
provided with space
rigor research andin the
records of mankind.that
the methodology In doing this,employ.
historians Annahales thinkers
Historical married history
methodology withcertain
comprises other techniques
disciplines like
geography,
and rulesanthropology,
that historiansarchaeology, and linguistics.
follow in order to properly utilize sources and historical evidences in
writing history. Certain rules apply in cases conflicting accounts in different sources, and how to
properly treat eye witness accounts and oral sources as valid historical evidence. In doing so,
historical claims done by the historians and the arguments that they forward in their historical
writings, while ma be influenced by the historian’s inclinations, can still be validated by using
reliable evidences and employing correct and meticulous historical methodology.
 For example, if a historian chooses to use an oral account as his data in studying the ethnic
history of the Ifugaos in the Cordilleras during the American occupation, he needs to validate
his claims oh his informant through comparing and corroborating it with written sources.
Therefore while bias is inevitable, the historian can balance this out by relying to evidences that
back up his claim. In this sense, the historian need not let his bias blind his judgment and such
bias is only acceptable if he maintains his rigor as a researcher.

Historical Sources
With the past as history’s subject matter, the historian’s most important research tools
are historical sources. In general, historical sources can be classified between primary and
secondary sources. The classification of sources between these two categories depends on the
historical subject being studied. Primary sources are those produced at the same time as the
event, period, or subject being studied. For Example, if a historian wishes to study the
Commonwealth Constitution Convention 1935, his primary sources can include the minutes of
the convention, newspaper clippings, Philippine Commission reports of the US Commissioners,
records of the convention, the draft of the Constitution, and even the pictures of the event.
Eyewitness accounts of convention delegates and their memoirs can also be used as primary
sources. The same goes other subjects of historical study. Archival documents, artifacts,
memorabilia, letters, census, and government records, among others are the most common
examples of primary sources.

On the other hand, secondary sources are those sources, which were produced by an
author who used primary sources to produce the material. In other words, secondary,
secondary sources are historical sources, which studied a certain historical subject. For example
on the subject of Philippine Revolution of 1896, students can read Teodoro Agoncillo’s Revolt
of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan published originally in 1956. The
Philippine Revolution happened in the last years of the 19 th century while Agoncillo published
his work in 1956, which makes the Revolt of the Masses a secondary source. More than this, in
writing the book, Agoncillo used primary sources with his research like documents of the
Katipunan, interview with the veterans of the Revolution, and correspondence between and
among the Katipuneros.

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

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

Internal criticism, on the other hand, is the examination of the truthfulness of the
evidence. It looks at the content of the source and examines the circumstances of its
production. Internal criticism looks at the truthfulness and the factuality of the evidence by
looking at the author of the source, its context the behind its creation, the knowledge which
informed it, and its intended purpose, among others. For example, Japanese reports and
declarations during the period of the war should not be taken as a historical fact hastily.
Internal criticism entails that the historian acknowledge and analyze hoe such reports can be
manipulated to be used as war propaganda. Validating historical sources can lead to equally
false conclusions. Without thorough criticisms of historical evidences, historical deceptions and
lies will be highly probable.
 One of the most scandalous cases of deception in Philippine history is the hoax Code of
Kalantiaw. The code was a set of rules contained in the epic, Maragtas, which was allegedly
written by a certain Datu Kalantiaw. The document was sold to the National Library and was
regarded as an important precolonial document until in 1968, when American historian William
Henry Scott debunked the authenticity of the code due to anachronism and lack of evidence to
prove that the code existed in the precolonial Philippine society. Ferdinand Marcos also claimed
that he was a decorated World War II soldier who led a guerilla unit Ang Maharlika. This was
widely believed by students of history and Marcos had war medals to show. This claim,
however, was disproven when historian counterchecked Marco’s claims with the war records
of the United States. These cases prove how deceptions can propagate without rigorous
historical research.

The task of the historian is to look at the available historical sources and select the most
relevant
Philippineand meaningful for
historiography history and
underwent thechanges
several subject since
matter thethat he is studying.
precolonial History,
period until the like
other academic
present. Ancientdiscipline, has come
Filipinos narrated a long
their waythrough
history but stillcommunal
has a lot of remaining
songs tasks
and epics thattomaydo.be
It
does
passed not claim
orally fromto arender
generationabsolute and exact
to another. Whenjudgment because
the Spaniards came, astheir
longchroniclers
as questions are
stared
continuously
recording their asked, and as long
observations as time
through unfolds,
written the study
accounts. of history can
The perspectives never be writing
of historical complete.
and
The
inquiry also shifted. The Spanish colonizers narrated the history of their colony in a bipartite for
task of the historian is to the past that is being created so that it can offer lessons
nations, societies
view. They saw the and
agecivilization.
before theItcolonization
is the historian’s jobperiod
as a dark to seekinfor
thethe meaning
history ofislands,
of the recovering
until
the
theypast to letlight
brought the through
people see the continuing
Western thought andrelevance of provenance,
Christianity. memory,
Early nationalist remembering
refuted this
and historicaland
perspective understanding for both view.
argued the tripartite the present
They sawandthe
theprecolonial
future. society as a luminous age
that ended with darkness when the colonizers captured their freedom. They believed that the
light would come again once the colonizers were evicted from the Philippines. Filipino historian
Zeus Salazar introduced the new guiding philosophy for writing and teaching history: pantayong
pananaw ( for us- from us perspective). This perspective highlights the importance of facilitating
an internal conversation and discourse among Filipinos about our own history, using the
language that is understood by everyone.