READINGS IN

PHILIPPINE HISTORY
Camille M. Martinez,
LPT
College Instructor
 LESSON 1:

INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY:
DEFINITION, ISSUES,
METHODOLOGY, AND
HISTORICAL SOURCE
WHAT IS HISTORY?
 HISTORY
• the study of the past.
• Students of general education often
dread the subject for its notoriety in
requiring them to memorize dates,
places, names, and events from distant
eras. This low appreciation of the
discipline may be rooted in the shallow
understanding of history’s relevance to
their lives and their respective
contexts. While the popular definition
 HISTORY
• was derived from the Greek word
historia, which means “knowledge
acquired through inquiry or
investigation.”
• existed as a discipline for around 2,400
years and is as old as mathematics and
philosophy.
• The 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
HISTORY
• became an important academic
discipline.
• became the historian’s duty to write
about the lives of important
individuals like monarchs, heroes,
saints, and nobilities.
• was also focused on writing about
wars, revolutions, and other
important breakthroughs. It is thus
important to ask: What counts as
history? Traditional historians lived
 QUESTIONS AND
ISSUES IN HISTORY
 QUESTIONS AND ISSUES IN
Indeed, history as a discipline has
HISTORY
already turned into a complex and
dynamic inquiry. This dynamism
inevitably produced various
perspectives on the discipline regarding
different questions like:

• What is history?
• Why study history?
• And history for whom?
 WHAT IS
HISTORIOGRAPHY?
HISTORIOGRAPHY
• in its simplest terms, is the history
of history.
• should not be confused with history.
The former’s object of 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 a certain historical
text written? Who wrote it? What
HISTORIOGRAPHY
• The methods employed by the
historian and the theory and
perspective, that guided him, will
also be analyzed. Historiography
is important for someone who
studies history because it teaches
the student to be critical on the
lessons of history presented to
him.
 History has played various
roles in the past. States use history
to unite a nation. It can be used as a
tool to legitimize regimes and forge
a sense of collective identity through
collective memory. Lessons from the
past can be used to make sense of
the present. Learning of past
mistakes can help people not to
repeat them. Being reminded of a
great past can inspire people to
 One of the problems confronted
by history is the accusation that
history is always written by victors.
This connotes that the narrative of
the past is always written from the
bias of the powerful and more
dominant player.
HISTORY AND THE
HISTORIAN
HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN
• If history is written with an
agenda or is heavily influenced by
the historian, is it possible to
come up with an absolute
historical truth?
• Is history an objective discipline?
• If it is not, is it still worthwhile to
study history?
HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN
These questions have haunted
historians for many generations.
Indeed, an exact and accurate
account of the past is impossible
for the very simple reason that we
cannot go back to the past. We
cannot access the past directly as
our subject matter. Historians only
get to access a representation of
HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN
Therefore, it is the historian’s job
not just to seek historical evidence
and facts but also to interpret
these facts. “Facts cannot speak
for themselves.” It has been the
job of historians to give meaning to
these facts and organize them into
a timeline, establish causes, and
write history. Meanwhile, the
HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN
He is a person of his own who is
influenced by his context, environment,
ideology, education, and influences
among others. In that sense, his
interpretation of the historical fact is
affected by his context and
circumstances. His subjectivity will
inevitably influence the process of his
historical research: the methodology
that he will use, the facts that he shall
select and deem relevant, his
HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN
Given the fact that historians are
subjective writers, another question
arises regarding them. How would we
differentiate historians from non-
historians? Historians who write history
emphasize the value of primary sources,
that is those sources actually dating
from a particular period, while
understanding the limitations of such
sources. Non-historians read books or
watch documentaries, while historians
HISTORIANS
• Involve complex relations
between interrelated factors.
• Know that all sources, even
those original to a particular
historical time period, have
some biases, omissions,
contradictions, or various other
limitations.
• List all the sources that they
HISTORIANS
• Know that the philosophy and
methodology of history have
changed over time and will keep
changing.
• Tends to focus more on the
specific, detailed developments
that underpin the
generalizations, and sometimes
question or reject the
generalizations themselves.
NON-HISTORIANS
• Often romanticize the past and
speak of the “good old days”
when they believe that things
were generally better than at
present.

• Derive information mainly from

television, movies, and the
internet as well as some books
or magazines. They generally
NON-HISTORIANS
• Assume that historians have
always approached history the
same way.

• Make broad generalizations

about people, ideas, events, or
periods in history.

• Assume that periods are fixed

and absolute.
HISTORICAL SOURCES
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 as between primary and
secondary sources. The classification
of these two categories depends on
the historical subject being studied.
According to Mary Woodley of CSUN
Oviatt Library, there are three types
of historical sources. These are the
PRIMARY SOURCES
• those sources produced at the same
time as the event, period, or subject
being studied.
• Examples of this are minutes about or
from the event, newspapers, reports,
records, and even photographs of the
event.
• Eyewitness accounts of the event and
their memoirs can also be used as
primary sources.
SECONDARY SOURCES
• those sources which were
produced by an author who
used primary sources to
produce the material.
• historical sources that study a
certain historical subject.
TERTIARY SOURCES
• those used to organize and locate
secondary and primary sources.
• An example of this is the indexes.
Indexes
• provide citations that fully identify
a work with information such as
author, titles of a book, article,
and/or journal, publisher and
publication date, volume and issue
number, and page numbers.
 EXTERNAL AND
INTERNAL CRITICISMS
EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL
The three
CRITICISMS types of historical sources
are useful in writing and learning
history. However, historians and
students of history need to thoroughly
scrutinize these historical sources to
avoid deception and to come up with
the historical truth. The historian
should be able to conduct an external
and internal criticism of the source,
especially primary sources which can
EXTERNAL CRITICISM
• the practice of verifying the
authenticity of evidence by
examining its physical
characteristics; consistency with the
historical characteristics 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
INTERNAL CRITICISM
• is the examination of the
truthfulness of the evidence. It looks
at the source and examines the
circumstances of its production.

• It looks at the truthfulness and

factuality of the evidence by looking
at the author of the source, its
context, the agenda behind its
creation, the knowledge that
Validating historical sources is
important because the use of
unverified, falsified, and untruthful
historical sources can lead to equally
false conclusions. Without

criticisms of historical evidences,

historical deceptions and lies will be
What is the difference between
historian and non-historian?
What are the three types of historical
sources?
What is the difference between them?
Why is it important to conduct an
external and internal historical source
criticism?
How important is history to you as a
person? As a student? As a citizen?
YOUR LEARNING
OUTCOME 1
YOUR LEARNING OUTCOME 1
Choose one historical event in the
Philippines. Find historical sources
about it then analyze and interpret it to
better understand the event, its
perspectives, and their significance. Be
guided by the following 4rubric:
pts.
4 pts.
Selection of event 4 pts.
Analysis of sources 4 pts.
Interpretation of event 4 pts.
1. What is the primary focus of the academic discipline of

history?

A. The collection of artifacts only

B. The study of current events

C. The prediction of future events

D. The study and analysis of the past

2. What does the term “historia” signify in its original

Greek context?

A. A collection of myths

B. A record of future predictions

C. A simple list of dates

D. Acquired through inquiry

3. What is the distinction between primary and secondary

sources in historical methodology?

A. Primary sources are always more reliable than secondary

sources

B. There is no distinction ; both are the same

C. Secondary sources are original documents; primary

sources are interpretations

D. Primary sources are original documents; secondary

4. Why might students have a low appreciation for the

discipline of history?

A. They think history is only about famous people

B. They see it as requiring memorization of dates and

events

C. They find it easier to study history subjects

D. They believe history has no impact on the present

5. What was the traditional historian’s mantra regarding

historical evidence?

A. All history must be written

B. Only wars are history

C. No document, no history

D. Oral history is sufficient

6. How have historians expanded their methods of studying

history?

A. By collaborating only with writers

B. By ignoring non-elite histories

C. By using traditions and artifacts

D. By focusing only on written documents

7. What is historiography primarily concerned with ?

A. The study of how history is written and understood

B. The methods used to collect historical artifacts

C. The scientific analysis of genetic patterns in societies

D. The events that happened in the past

8. What role has history played in the context of nation-

building?

A. It has been ignored in favor of modern political

strategies

B. It has been used solely for academic purposes without

societal impact

C. It has only served to highlight divisions within societies

9. Why do students of history need to understand

historiography?

A. It helps them critically analyze historical texts and

narratives

B. It encourages them to focus solely on primary sources

without analysis
10. What is the common criticism of historical narratives

according to the text?

A. History is always objective and unbiased

B. History is often written by the victors

C. History only reflects the views of the oppressed

D. All historical narratives are equally valid

THANK
YOU!