CHAPTER 2

CONTENT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OFF

SELECTED PRIMARY SOURCES

(Week 3-6)

Prologue

What skills or competencies do history students need to develop? Students need to develop several
skills in studying history. Fundamentality, they must have the competence in assessing evidences and
evaluating conflicting interpretations. Because historians use various evidences in shaping their
historical accounts, it is imperative that students learn how to sort out, interpret and weigh evidences.
By critically examining evidences and interpretations that are subjective and self-serving, they are able
to identify prejudices and biases in the writing.

As students in Philippine history, performing context and content analysis is considered an essential
learning outcome. Developing such competence requires students to have a rich exposure of primary
sources where they have a first-hand experience in making context and content analysis. "Context"
means the social meaning or shared interpretation of a situation which is the underlying perspective
reflected in the text. Contextual information in the text may be analyzed within social, political,
economic or religious framework. In doing context analysis, students interpret and make sound
judgment on the historical situation of the source. They journey to the time and place of the sources and
consequently feel the situation at that time. More importantly, they determine the author's background,
intent and authority on the subject and ascertain the sources' relevance and meaning in today's
landscape.

In contrast, content analysis allows students to apply appropriate techniques depending on the type of
source (written, oral, visual). In a written source, for example, students read the text or historical
transcript and analyze the meaning of such words and concepts. Thereafter, they develop inferences
and draw conclusions about the messages of the texts where they present the writer's point of view as
well as the audience to which the material is written. It is also in doing content analysis that students are
able to identify the author's main argument or thesis, compare points of view, identify biases, and-
evaluate his claim based on evidences or available evidences at the time.

Topics covered in this chapter:

Content and contextual analysis of selected primary sources; identification of the historical importance
of the text; and examination of the author's main argument and point of view.
Learning outcomes:

 Analyze the context, content, and perspective of the different kinds of primary sources using
OPVL method and other models of primary source analysis;

 Determine the contribution and connection of the different kinds of primary sources in
understanding Philippine history and contemporary society; and

 Develop critical and analytical skills with exposure to primary sources.

Readings and Sources:

Minnesota Humanities Center, "A Guide for Using Primary Source or Original Source Documents", (n.d)
file:///C:/Readings%20in%20Philippine%20History/OPVL%20201504070851.pdf

Excerpts from History of the Philippine Islands by Antonio de Morga

Excerpts from History of the Philippine Province of the Islands of the Society of Jesus by Pedro Chirino

Jim Richarson (2013), "The Kartilla of Katipunan" in The Light of Liberty: Documents and Studies on the
Katipunan, 1892-1897, " [Declaration of Principle]. Loyola Heights, Quezon City. Ateneo de Manila
University Press, 129-137

READING 4

Introduction:

Imparting history through primary sources links students to the past in many significant and powerful
ways. It can offer eye opening perspectives among students to see the advantages of primary
documents over textbook accounts. This is essential especially that some students believe that history is
impersonal and therefore irrelevant to their lives. Inasmuch as this course analyzes Philippine history
from the lens of primary sour students must be given opportunity to perform content and contextual
analysis of the different kinds of primary sources. This experience allows them to learn how “to do”
history like historians. They interpret evidences and to piece together a narrative of historical
explanation and to construct richer meaning of the everyday world around them. Moreover, they
participate in asking questions where they develop critical thinking, intelligent inferences, and reasoned
arguments and insights of events and issues in the past and present.

For students to have a glimpse of using and analyzing primary sources, the reading titled "A Guide for
Using Source or Original Source Documents" by Minnesota Humanities Center (n.d.) is presented in this
section. The article presents one of the many techniques or methods in analyzing historical sources
called Origin, Purpose, Value, and Limitation (OPVL). This method is sometimes known as Document
Based Questions (DBQ) which is very important in analyzing historical documents.

Learning Objectives:

After reading the text, each student will be able to:

1. Explain the process of Origin, Purpose, Value and Limitation (OPVL) as a technique for analyzing
historical documents;

2. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of primary and secondary data in historical writing;

3. Explain why "limitation" is the hardest stage in OPLV technique;

4. Explain why being biased does not limit the value of a source; and

5. Compare OPVL with other techniques in analyzing historical documents.

A Guide for Using Primary Source or Original Source Documents

Origin, Purpose, Value and Limitation (OPVL) is a technique for analyzing historical documents. It is used
extensively in the International Baccalaureate curriculum and testing materials, and is incredibly helpful
in teaching students to be critical observers. It is also known as Document Based Questions (DBQ).

OPVL can be adapted to be used in any grade. Younger students can answer more concrete, factual
questions about a document, while older students have more capacity for abstract reasoning, placing
documents in historical context, and drawing conclusions.

Origin:

In order to analyze a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not all of these questions can be
answered. The more you do know about where a document is coming from, the easier it is to ascertain
purpose, value and limitation. The definition of primary and secondary source materials can be
problematic. There is constant debate among academic circles on how to definitively categorize certain
documents and there is no clear rule of what makes a document a primary or a secondary source.

Primary - Letter, journal, interview, speeches, photos, paintings, etc. Primary sources are created by
someone who is the "first person", these documents can also be called "original source documents. The
author or creator is presenting original materials as a result of discovery or to share new information or
opinions. Primary documents have not been filtered through interpretation or evaluation by others. In
order to get a complete picture of an event or era, it is necessary to consult multiple--and often
contradictory--sources.
Secondary - materials that are written with the benefit of hindsight and materials that filter primary
sources through interpretation or evaluation. Books commenting on a historical incident in history are
secondary sources. Political cartoons can be tricky because they can be considered either primary or
secondary.

Note: One is not more reliable than the other. Valuable information can be gleaned from both Types of
documents. A primary document can tell you about the original author’s perspective; a secondary
document can tell you how the primary document was received during a specific time period or by a
specific audience.

Other questions must be answered beyond whether the source is primary or secondary and will give you
much more information about the document that will help you answer questions in the other
categories.

 Who created it?

 Who is the author?

 When was it created?

 When was it published?

 Where was it published?

 Who is publishing it?

 Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our evaluation?

This last question is especially important. The more you know about the author of a document, the
easier it is to answer the foregoing questions.

Purpose:

This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to figure out the purpose for its
creation. You must be able to think as the author of the document. At this point you are still only
focusing on the single piece of work you are evaluating.

 Why does this document exist?

 Why did the author create this piece of work? What is the intent?

 Why did the author choose this particular format?

 Who is the intended audience? Who was the author thinking would receive this?

 What does the document "say'"?

If you are teaching at the high school level, try to steer students away from saying "I think the document
means this..." Obviously, if students are making a statement it is coming from their thinking. Help them
practice saying "The document means this… because it is supported by x evidence."

Value:

Now comes the hard part. Putting on your historian hat, you must determine: Based on who wrote it,
when/where it came from and why it was created...what value does this document have as a piece of
evidence? This is where you show your expertise and put the piece in context. Bring in your outside
information here.

 What can we tell about the author from the piece?

 What can we tell about the time period from the piece?

 Under what circumstances was the piece created and how does the piece reflect those
circumstances?

 What can we tell about any controversies from the piece?

 Does the author represent a particular 'side' of a controversy or event?

 What can we tell about the author's perspectives from the piece?

 What was going on in history at the time the piece was created and how does this piece
accurately reflect it?

It helps if you know the context of the document and can explain what the document helps you to
understand about the context.

Limitation:

This is probably the hardest part. The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather
to say: at what point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians?

With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole is a given because the
source was created by one person (or a small group of people?), naturally they will not have given every
detail of the context. Do not say that the author left out information unless you have concrete proof
(from another source) that they chose to leave information out.

Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events that came after the creation of
the document. Do not state that the document "does not explain X" (if X happened later).
Being biased does not limit the value of a source! If you are going to comment on the bias of a
document, you must go into detail. Who is it biased towards? Who is it biased against? What part of a
story does it leave out? What part of the story is MISSING because of parts left out?

 What part of the story can we NOT tell from this document?

 How could we verify the content of the piece?

 Does this piece inaccurately reflect anything about the time period?

 What does the author leave out and why does he/she leave it out (if you know)?

 What is purposely not addressed?

This is again an area for you to show your expertise of the context. You need to briefly explain the parts
of the story that the document leaves out. Give examples of other documents that might mirror or
answer this document. What parts of the story/context can this document not tell?

Guide Questions for Better Understanding

1. What is an origin? What questions can be asked when evaluating the origin or a primary source?

2. Why is there a need to know the origin of a primary source?

3. What are the advantages and disadvantages of primary and secondary sources?

4. What is a purpose? What questions can be asked when evaluating the purpose of a primary source?

5. Why is there a need to know the purpose of a primary source?

6. What is a limitation? What questions can be asked when evaluating the limitation of a primary
source?

7. Why is there a need to know the limitation of a primary source?

8. Why is "limitation" considered the hardest stage in the OPLV technique?

9. Why is it that being biased does not limit the value of a source?

10. What are the advantages of using OPVL in historical document analysis?

Issues for Discourse

1. "A page of history is worth a volume of logic" - Oliver Wendell Holmes. How would you relate this
statement with critical historical method used by historians like the OPVL?
2. Examine the following statement in the context of "limitation" of OPVL as a technique in analyzing
historical source? "While there is no such thing as neutrality in the telling of history, there is such a thing
as objectivity, and that varied interpretations of historical evidence are yet susceptible to generally
agreed upon procedures of verification that allow us to challenge each others' readings of the
evidence."-Carl Trueman.

3. Explain the following statement: "All knowledge constructed in the discipline of history is necessarily
more or less probable and fallible, it is subjected to permanent disciplinary self-correction based
primarily on the accumulation of new evidence, new hypotheses and new arguments." - Marek Tamm

4. Relate the following statement with "purpose" in OPVL: "It used to be said that facts speak for
themselves. This is, of course, untrue. The facts, speak only when the historian calls on them: it is he
who decides to which facts to give the door, and in what order or context." - E. H. Carr