Chapter 1

Introduction to History: Definition, Issues, Sources,

and Methodology

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

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

Definition and Subject Matter

History has always been known as the study of the past. Students of general education often
dread the subject 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 from the shallow
understanding of history's relevance to their lives and to their respective contexts. While the
popular definition of history as the study of the past is not wrong, it does not give justice to the
complexity of the subject and its importance to human civilization.
History was derived from the Greek word historia which means “knowledge acquired
through inquiry or investigation.” History as a discipline existed for around 2,400 years and is as
old as mathematics and philosophy. This term was then adapted to classical Latin where it acquired
a new definition. Historia became known as the account of the past of a person or of a group of
people through written documents and historical evidences. That meaning stuck until the early
parts of the twentieth century. History became an important academic discipline. It became the
historian's duty to write about the lives of important individuals like monarchs, heroes, saints, and
nobilities. History was also focused on writing about wars, revolutions, and other important
breakthroughs. It is thus important to ask: What counts as history? Traditional historians lived with
the mantra of “no document, no history.” It means that unless a written document can prove a
certain historical event, then it cannot be considered as a historical fact.
But as any other academic disciplines, history progressed and opened up to the possibility
of valid historical sources, which were not limited to written documents, like government records,
chroniclers’ accounts, or personal letters. Giving premium to written, documents essentially
invalidates the history of other civilizations that do not keep written records. Some were keener on
passing their history by word of mouth. Others got their historical documents burned or destroyed

1
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente
in the events of war or colonization. Restricting historical evidence as exclusively written is also
discrimination against other social classes who were not recorded in paper. Nobilities, monarchs,
the elite, and even the middle class would have their birth, education, marriage, and death as
matters of government and historical record. But what of peasant families or indigenous groups
who were not given much thought about being registered to government records? Does the absence
of written documents about them mean that they were people of no history or past? Did they even
exist?
This loophole was recognized by historians who started using other kinds of historical
sources, which may not be in written form but were just as valid. A few of these examples are oral
traditions in forms of epics and songs, artifacts, architecture, and memory. History thus became
more inclusive and started collaborating with other disciplines as its auxiliary disciplines. With the
aid of archaeologists, historians can use artifacts from a bygone era to study ancient civilizations
that were formerly ignored in history because of lack of documents. Linguists can also be helpful
in tracing historical evolutions, past connections among different groups, and flow of cultural
influence by studying language and the changes that it has undergone. Even scientists like
biologists and biochemists can help with the study of the past through analyzing genetic and DNA
patterns of human societies.

Questions and Issues in History

Indeed, history as a discipline has already turned into a complex and dynamic inquiry. This
dynamism inevitably produced various perspectives on the discipline regarding different questions
like: What is history? Why study history? And history for whom? These questions can be answered
by historiography. In simple terms, historiography is the history of history. History and
historiography should not be confused with. each other. The former’s object of study 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
was the context of its publication? What particular historical method was employed? What were
the sources used?). Thus, historiography lets the students have a better understanding of history.
They do not only get to learn historical facts, but they are also provided with the understanding of
the facts’ and the historian’s contexts. The methods employed by the historian and the theory and
perspective, which guided him, will also be analyzed. Historiography is important for someone
who studies history because it teaches the student to be critical in the lessons of history presented
to him.
History has played various roles 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 keep their
good practices to move forward.

Positivism is the school of thought that emerged between the eighteenth and nineteenth century.
This thought 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.

As a narrative, any history that has been taught and written is always intended for a certain
group of audience. When the ilustrados, like Jose Rizal, Isabelo de los Reyes, and Pedro Paterno
wrote history, they intended it for the Spaniards so that they would realize that Filipinos are people

2
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente
of their own intellect and culture. When American historians depicted the Filipino people as
uncivilized in their publications, they intended that narrative for their fellow Americans to justify
their colonization of the islands. They wanted the colonization to appear not as a means of
undermining the Philippines’ sovereignty, but as a civilizing mission to fulfill what they called as
the “white man's burden.” The same is true for nations which prescribe official versions of their
history like North Korea, the Nazi Germany during the war period, and Thailand. The same was
attempted by Marcos in the Philippines during the 1970s.

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

One of the problems confronted by history is the accusation that the history is always
written by victors. This connotes that the narrative of the past is always written from the bias of
the powerful and the more dominant player. For instance, the history of the Second World War in
the Philippines always depicts the United States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army as the
oppressors. Filipinos who collaborated with the Japanese were lumped in the category of traitors
or collaborators. However, a more thorough historical investigation will reveal a more nuanced
account of the history of that period instead of a simplified narrative as a story of hero versus
villain.

History and the Historian

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? If it is not, is it still
worthwhile to study history? These questions have haunted historians for many generations.
Indeed, an exact and accurate account of the past is impossible for the very simple reason that we
cannot go back to the past. We cannot access the past directly as our subject matter. Historians only
get to access representation of the past through historical sources and evidences.
Therefore, it is the historian's job not just to seek historical evidences and facts but also to
interpret these facts. “Facts cannot speak for themselves.” It is the job of the historian to give
meaning to these facts and organize them into a timeline, establish causes, and write history.
Meanwhile, the historian is not a blank paper who mechanically interprets and analyzes present
historical fact. He is a person of his own who is influenced by his own context, environment,
ideology, education, and influences, among others. In that sense, his interpretation of the historical
fact is affected by his context and circumstances. His subjectivity will inevitably influence the
process of his historical research: the methodology that he will use, the facts that he shall select
and deem relevant, his interpretation, and even the form of his writings. Thus, in one way or
another, history is always subjective. If that is so, can history still be considered as an academic
and scientific inquiry?
Historical research requires rigor. Despite the fact that historians cannot ascertain absolute
objectivity, the study of history remains scientific because of the rigor of research and methodology
that historians employ. Historical methodology comprises certain techniques and rules that
historians follow in order to properly utilize sources and historical evidence in writing history.
Certain rules apply in cases of conflicting accounts in different sources, and on how to properly
treat eyewitness accounts and oral sources as valid historical evidence. In doing so, historical
claims done by historians and the arguments that they forward in their historical writings, while

3
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente
may be influenced by the historian’s inclinations, can still be validated by using reliable evidences
and employing correct and meticulous historical methodology.

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

For example, if a historian chooses to use an oral account as his data in studying the ethnic
history of the Ifugaos in the Cordilleras during the American Occupation, he needs to validate the
claims of his informant through comparing and corroborating it with written sources. Therefore,
while bias is inevitable, the historian can balance this out by relying to evidences that back up his
claim. In this sense, the historian need not let his bias blind his judgment and such bias is only
acceptable if he maintains his rigor as a researcher.

Historical Sources

With the past as history's subject matter, the historian's most important research tools are
historical sources. In general, historical sources can 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 sources produced at the same time as the event,
period, or subject being studied. For example, if a historian wishes to study the Commonwealth
Constitution Convention of 1935, his primary sources can include the minutes of the convention,
newspaper clippings, Philippine Commission reports of the U.S. Commissioners, records of the
convention, the draft of the Constitution, and even photographs of the event. Eyewitness accounts
of convention delegates and their memoirs can also be used as primary sources. The same goes
with other subjects of historical study. Archival documents, artifacts, memorabilia, letters, census,
and government records, among others are the most common examples of primary sources.
On the other hand, secondary sources are those sources, which were produced by an author
who used primary sources to produce the material. In other words, secondary sources are historical
sources, which studied a certain historical subject. For example, on the subject of the Philippine
Revolution of 1896, students can read Teodoro Agoncillo’s Revolt of the Masses: The Story of
Bonifacio and the Katipunan published originally in 1956. The Philippine Revolution happened in
the last years of the nineteenth century while Agoncillo published his work in 1956, which makes
the Revolt of the Masses a secondary source. More than this, in writing the book, Agoncillo used
primary sources with his research like documents of the Katipunan, interview with the veterans of
the Revolution, and correspondence between and among Katipuneros.
However, a student should not be confused about what counts as a primary or a secondary
source. As mentioned above, the classification of sources between primary and secondary depends
not on the period when the source was produced or the type of the source but on the subject of the
historical research. For example, a textbook is usually classified as a secondary source, a tertiary
source even. However, this classification is usual but not automatic. If a historian chooses to write
the history of education in the 1980s, he can utilize textbooks used in that period as a primary
source. If a historian wishes to study the historiography of the Filipino-American War for example,
he can use works of different authors on the topic as his primary source as well.

4
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente
 Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and learning history. However,
historians and students of history need to thoroughly scrutinize these historical sources to avoid
deception and to come up with the historical truth. The historian should be able to conduct an
external and internal criticism of the source, especially primary sources which can age in centuries.
External criticism is the practice of verifying the authenticity of evidence by examining its physical
characteristics; consistency with the historical characteristic of the time when it was produced; and
the materials used for the evidence. Examples of the things that will be examined when conducting
external criticism of a document include the quality of the paper, the type of the ink, and the
language and words used in the material, among others.
Internal criticism, on the other hand. is the examination of the truthfulness of the evidence.
It looks at the content of the source and examines the circumstance of its production. Internal
criticism 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 which informed it, and its
intended purpose, among others. For example, Japanese reports and declarations during the period
of the war should not be taken as a historical fact hastily. Internal criticism entails that the historian
acknowledge and analyze how such reports can be manipulated to be used as war propaganda.
Validating historical sources is important because the use of unverified, falsified, and untruthful
historical sources can lead to equally false conclusions. Without thorough criticisms of historical
evidences, historical deceptions and lies will be highly probable.
One of the most scandalous cases of deception in Philippine history is the hoax Code of
Kalantiaw. The code was a set of rules contained in an epic, Maragtas, which was allegedly written
by a certain Datu Kalantiaw. The document was sold to the National Library and was regarded as
an important precolonial document until 1968, when American historian William Henry Scott
debunked the authenticity of the code due to anachronism and lack of evidence to prove that the
code existed in the precolonial Philippine society. Ferdinand Marcos also claimed that he was a
decorated World War II soldier who led a guerilla unit called Ang Maharlika. This was widely
believed by students of history and Marcos had war medals to show. This claim, however, was
disproven when historians counterchecked Marcos's claims with the war records of the United
States. These cases prove how 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 and meaningful for history and for the subject matter that he is studying. History, like
other academic discipline, has come a long way but still has a lot of remaining tasks to do. It does
not claim to render absolute and exact judgment because as long as questions are continuously
asked, and as long as time unfolds, the study of history can never be complete. The task of the
historian is to organize the past that is being created so that it can offer lessons for nations, societies,
and civilization. It is the historian's job to seek for the meaning of recovering the past to let the
people see the continuing relevance of provenance, memory, remembering, and historical
understanding for both the present and the future.

Philippine historiography underwent several changes since the precolonial period until the present.
Ancient Filipinos narrated their history through communal songs and epics that they passed orally from
a generation to another. When the Spaniards came, their chroniclers started recording their observations
through written accounts. The perspective of historical writing and inquiry also shifted. The Spanish
colonizers narrated the history of their colony in a bipartite view. They saw the age before colonization
as a dark period in the history of the islands, until they brought light through Western thought and
Christianity. Early nationalists refuted this perspective and argued the tripartite view. They saw the
precolonial society as a luminous age that ended with darkness when the colonizers captured their
freedom. They believed that the light would come again once the colonizers were evicted from the
Philippines. Filipino historian Zeus Salazar introduced the new guiding philosophy for writing and
teaching history: pantayong pananaw (for us – from us perspective). This perspective highlights the
importance of facilitating an internal conversation and discourse among Filipinos about our own history,
using the language that is understood by everyone.

5
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente
Chapter Exercises
A. True or False. Write true if the statement is true. Otherwise, write false in the space provided.
______ 1. History is the study of the past.
______ 2. Historical sources that were not written should not be used in writing history.
______ 3. The subject of historiography is history itself.
______ 4. History has no use for the present, thus, the saying “past is past” is true.
______ 5. History is limited to the story of a hero versus a villain.
______ 6. Only primary sources may be used in writing history.
______ 7. There are three types of sources: primary, secondary, and tertiary sources.
______ 8. External criticism is done by examining the physical characteristics of a source.
______ 9. Internal criticism is done by looking at a source’s quality of paper and type of
ink, among others.
______ 10. The historians are the only source of history.

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

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

3. Lorena was a new teacher of Araling Panlipunan in a small elementary school in Mauban,
Quezon. Her colleagues gave her the new textbook that she ought to use in class. Before the
class started, Lorena studied the textbook carefully. She noted that the authors used works y
other known historians in writing the textbook. She saw that the bibliography included
Teodoro Agoncillo’s The Revolt of the Masses and The Fateful Years: Japan’s Adventure in

6
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente
 the Philippines, 1941-45. She also saw that the authors used Ma. Luisa Camagay’s Working
Women of Manila During the 19th Century and many others.
Is the textbook a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source?
__________________________________________________________________________

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

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

C. My Primary Sources. Using the examples of a primary source in this chapter, bring a primary
source that can be used in the writing of your life history. Present this in class and discuss how
it qualifies as a primary source.

References
Carr, E. (1991). What is History. London, United Kingdom: Penguin.
Lemon, M. (1995). The Discipline of History and the History of Thought. New York, United States
of America: Routledge.
Tosh, J. (2002). The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the Study of Modern
History (Revised 3rd Ed.). London, United Kingdom: Pearson Education Ltd.

7
Prepared by: M. G. Cardente