External & Internal Criticisms

• The METHOD [of History] pertains to the process of thoroughly examining and critically analyzing the records and survivals of
the past.

• It also means the accumulation of data about the past to be thoroughly examined and critically analyzed by a set of scientific
rules to determine whether a certain past that is attempted to reconstruct actually happened or not.

• HISTORIOGRAPHY refers the process of reconstructing historical data that have already been tested by the method.

Some Problems in Writing History

• Sources—are not available or accessible in the Philippines. They are sometimes difficult to find and, if written in Spanish,
difficult understand.

• Most of the people—who are considered participants or eyewitnesses are dead.

• The surviving sources (history as record and as materials), the surviving part of the recorded and recovered part of the
remembered and created part of the whole history (history-as-actuality), are difficult to reconstruct.

Examination of Sources

• External Criticism (Test of Authenticity / Genuineness / Originality)

• Internal Criticism (Test of Credibility / Reliability)

External Criticism The main purposes of External Criticism are to:

1. Determine fabricated sources and hoax stories from the real

2. Detect misleading sources

3. Identify the time, space, authorship and affiliation of the sources.

Why do we have to determine fabricated sources and hoax stories from the real?

• They bolster a false claim or title.

• They justify falsely the occurrence of an incident or event—i.e., abuses or wrongdoings.

• They create a basis or outlet for criticism by seriously considering practical jokes as historical facts.

Why does a source mislead?

• The source can deceive certain people (intentionally or unintentionally, good or bad) and, subsequently, scholars and
historians (for instance the eight rays of the Philippine flag which are allegedly represented by the eight provinces that revolted
against Spain).

* Fabricated Sources are also misleading.

• The source conceals motives and identities.

• The source is inappropriately ascribed to a person who commissioned a writer or editor to write it on his behalf, for instance a
speech.

• The source misrepresents the real date of its writing or publication, say a letter and a newspaper.

Something to Remember!

• The real author of the source must be identified and at least a surmise of his location in time and space and of his habits,
attitudes, character, learning or education, associates, cultural, orientation, religion, etc. must be examined.

• The author provides the authenticity and credibility of the source.

• The date when the document was written must be examined in order to know whether it conforms to the event being studied
and to the veracity of the information being examined, in case that the source

was written many years after the occurrence of the event.

• Anachronisms, handwriting style, alibi or other tests that are associated with the author's milieu, personality and actions
cannot possibly prove or disprove authenticity.

• Handwriting, signature, seal, letterhead, watermark, etc. must be identified accurately. Even when the handwriting is
unfamiliar, it can be compared with authenticated specimens. Paleography and what the

French call isography can be used.

• The provenance of sources kept in congress, government agencies, private libraries, archives, business firms, lawyers’ papers,
creates a presumption of genuineness.

Internal Criticism The following are the elements that affect the credibility of a source in telling the truth:

1. The ability of the source

2. The willingness of the source

3. Completeness of the source

4. Corroboration by other sources

Something to Remember!

• In examining the credibility of a source, the historian or the skilled/trained history researcher plays the role of a prosecutor,
attorney for the defense and judge all in one. But as a judge, he rules out no evidence whatever if it is relevant. To him, any
single detail of testimony is credible - even if it is contained in a document obtained by force or fraud, or is otherwise
impeachable, or is based on necessary evidence, or is from an interested witness - provided it can pass the test of credibility.

The Factors Affecting the Ability of a Source in Telling the Truth

• Nearness of the eyewitness [who wrote the source] to the event

a. Nearness geographically

b. Nearness chronologically

*Nearness to the event geographically and chronologically means the absence of barrier or obstruction to the event that should
have been witnessed.

• The Competence of the eyewitness or the source

*Competence refers to the degree of expertness that the eyewitness manifests, including his state of physical and mental
health, age, education, narrative skill, etc.

**The eyewitness is said to be incompetent if he merely assumes or estimates numerical data (hard data or specific data).

Factors that boosts the competence of an eyewitness or a source

1. The degree of attention given by the source to the event he narrated

2. The use of hypothetical questions in interrogating or examining the source instead of leading questions that are answerable
by yes or no.

3. When an eyewitness or source narrates an event, the narration must be progressive. He begins from a premise and ends not
with the same premise—i.e., missing reasoning in a circle.

4. The source or eyewitness must not be tainted with egocentrism or high regard of himself.
5. Although there is no such thing as objectivity in the strictest sense of the term, the source or eyewitness must exude it to a
certain extent.

• The truthfulness of the source which is affected by

1. The motive of the source or eyewitness

2. The bias of the source or eyewitness which emanates from his motive

2 Types of Biases:

- Stadium – bias that is in favor to the subject of the source

- Odium – bias that is against the subject of the source

3. The tendency to avoid displeasing people

4. The tendency to depart from strict veracity due to laws and conventions

5. The literary style used might mislead a historian or scholar from accuracy.

6. The expected character of the event or those who participated in it.

7. The inexact or inaccurate dating and vague description of the event, including the individuals who were involved in it.

The Failure to Completely Report Everything that Happened in the Past

• The failure to report everything emerges from the biases of the eyewitness or the source.

• The failure to report everything determines the objectivity (neutrality) or subjectivity (partiality) of the historian or researcher.

The Capability of the Source to be Corroborated with Other Independent Sources

• A primary information that has been derived from a primary source by the process of external criticism is not yet established
as historical fact. Although there is a strong presumption that it is trustworthy (reliable), the general rule of historians [with
exemption] is to accept it as historical fact only when it rests upon the independent testimony of two or more reliable
eyewitnesses or sources.

*An independent source is a kind of source that did not derive its details from another primary source.

Reading and Understanding Visual Sources

Historiophoty- representation of history and ideas about it through visual images and filmic discourse”.

It was coined by the historian and literary critic Hayden White in an essay that was published in 1988.
The essay was a response to Robert Rosenstone’s essay titled “History in Images/History in Words:
Reflections”
Pictures provide the progress or development of certain individuals, institutions or places in concrete and vivid images.

Editing of photographs began in the 1860s or 1870s, however the technology did not come immediately to the
Philippines. So far, there is no known record yet of photo editing during those years in the country.

The first photo to be edited was that of President Abraham Lincoln who stood behind his wife, Mary Ann Todd Lincoln.
The editing was thought to have happened in 1870 or earlier.

Due to the lack of available technology, editing of photographs was done manually by means of pasting images together.
Moreover, early editors had to rely likewise on the use of available tools like ink, paint and airbrushes. Editors who tried
to enlarge photographs had to do some adjustments like brightening or darkening various parts.
The editing of photographs using computer programs through the first personal computers were made initially in the
1980s.

With the release of the first version of Adobe Photoshop in 1987, editing of photographs started to become a common
practice. Since then, the word “photoshop” has become the common usage of people to mean an edited photo through
the use of the software.

The first mobile application photo editor called Fotolr Photo Editor was released in 2011 in App Store.

Before 1886, photographs were usually black and white until Levi Hill, a Baptist minister in New York who produced
apparently colored images through the enhancement of pigments.

The first colored photograph without the aid of any pigments or dyes was made in 1886 by a physicist and inventor
named Gabriel Lippman. Lippman’s contribution to photography earned him Nobel Prize in Physics in 1908.

Black and white photographs are usually credible because of the presumption that these photographs were taken at
older times.

As long as no tampering was made, photographs—whether black and white or colored—have strong credibility because
they show motionless episodes or registries of the occurrence of supposed events.

Due to the prevalence of editing applications at present, careful scrutiny on the veracity of photographs must be made.
The need for the help of experts might be necessary.

Caricatures or cartoons cannot be used as primary sources of information, UNLE THEY ARE USED AS THE THEME OF THE
STUDY in a content analysis, for instance

Caricatures should always be seen as EXAGGERATED ILLUSTRATIONS, DESCRIPTIONS OR IMITATIONS of people, objects,
situations or events in a specific period.

What is a PAINTING? the expression of ideas and emotions, with the creation of certain aesthetic
qualities, in a two-dimensional visual language.

Elements Needed in Reading and Understanding a Painting

P - Painting and Its Elements

1.Color It is arguably the most important element because it sets the tone for how viewers feel about the work. It can, for instance, be warm
and inviting or cold and stark.

2.Tone It is, essentially, how light or dark a paint is when you strip away the color. Understanding how to use it can greatly affect the way your
art is perceived.

3. Line is defined as a narrow mark made by a brush, or a line created where two objects or elements meet. It defines the subject of paintings
and helps us imply things such as movement.

4. Shape In essence, a shape is an enclosed area that is made when lines meet. When that shape takes on a third dimension (as in sculpture
or some mixed media), we then also have form.

5. Space It is the area in a surface which is occupied by the subject (positive space) and the areas around it (negative space).

6. Texture This can be interpreted as a pattern within the painting or the brushstrokes themselves. It means the roughness or smoothness of
the surface after the application of paint.

7. Composition is the arrangement of the painting. Where you place the subject, how the background elements support it, and every little
piece that you add to the canvas becomes part of the composition. It is critical to how the work is perceived.
8. Direction This may pertain to format, perspective or the course of the light in a painting. To some painters, a vertical canvas can work
better than a horizontal one for certain subjects and vice versa.

9. Size This refers to the scale of the painting itself as well as the scale of proportions within the painting's elements.

10. Time and Movement Time can be viewed as the amount of time a viewer spends looking at a piece. This refers to how you direct
the viewer's eye within the painting.

A-Aims, Presupposition and Values of the Painter, I – Interpretation / Representation, N - Notes about History?, T – Target Audience

A video or documentary presentation is a visual record of the past which shows the event or series of
events through moving pictures
V – Video, I – Intentions, D – Disagreements, E – Epistemological Support to Information or Arguments, O – Other Primary Sources

Though videos appear as more credible sources due to the combination of moving images and audio element, they are some of
the easiest materials to be tampered nowadays.

Color was first applied in motion pictures in the early years of the 20th century with Cupid Angling (1918) as the generally
accepted first colored film. Subsequent films were made such as Gone With The Wind by Technicolor in 1939.

In the Philippines, color was successfully applied in Ibong Adarna (1959), the generally accepted first Filipino colored film.

Massive use of visual effects, editing applications, etc. became prevalent in the 1990s and the 2000s in the Philippines.

Basic Assumptions
Black and white videos are usually credible because of the presumption that these videos were taken at earlier times.

As long as no tampering was made, videos—whether black and white or colored—have strong credibility because they show scenes or events as
they actually happened at a definite period in the past.

Before the invention of visual effects, editing applications, etc., videos were usually credible as primary sources of historical information.

Due to the prevalence of visual effects, editing applications, etc. at present, careful scrutiny on the veracity of videos must be made. The need
for the help of experts might be necessary.

THE SITE OF THE FIRST EASTER SUNDAY MASS IN THE PHILIPPINES

On March 31, 1521, the Philippines held its first documented Catholic Mass, called Easter Sunday Mass. This holy mass,
celebrated by Magellan’s order, marked the beginning of Roman Catholicism in the Philippines. It was officiated by a
priest ordered by Magellan, his name was Father Pedro de Valderrama on the shore of Mazaua in Pigafetta's Journal,
which people believe is the town of Limasawa in Southern Leyte.

However, a dispute over the location of the First Easter Sunday Mass in the Philippines began in the late 1800s and early
1900s, some groups proposed that the First Easter Sunday Mass was conducted in Butuan. As a result, the National
Historical Institute (NHI) has investigated the controversy alongside panels with differing claims about the location of the
first Easter Sunday mass, whether it is in Limasawa or Butuan.

Evidence for Limasawa

1. The Logbook of Francisco Albo

2. The Pigafetta Evidence

a. Testimony of Pigafetta, b. Pigafetta's map showing where they stayed in Mazaua, c. The two native Kings, d. "Mazaua"
for seven days, e. An argument based on omission.
3. Summary of Albo and Pigafetta's evidence

4. Confirmation from the Legazpi expedition

1. THE LOGBOOK OF FRANCISCO ALBO

- Francisco Albo is the pilot of Magellan's flagship, the "Trinidad."

- One of the 18 survivors who returned to the ship "Victoria" with Sebastian Elcano.

- He kept a journal of the events that occurred as their group traveled around the Philippines.

▪ On March 16, 1521, they sailed westward from Ladrones, saw land to the northwest, but did not approach due to too
many shallow spots. They later discovered that its name was Yunagan.

▪ Instead, they went south on the same day to another small island called Suluan, where they anchored. They saw some
canoes there, but they fled when the Spaniard approached. This island was located at 9 degrees and two-thirds north
latitude.

▪ They sailed westward from those two islands to the uninhabited island of "Gada," where they took in a supply of wood
and water.

▪ They sailed west from that island towards a large island called Seilani, which was inhabitedand known to have gold.

▪ Sailing south along the coast of Seilani, they turned southwest to a small island called "Mazava," which is also at a
latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees North.

▪ The people on the island of Mazava were wonderful. The Spaniards planted a cross on a mountain-top and were shown
three islands to the west and southwest, where they were told there was a lot of gold. "They showed us how the gold,
which came in small pieces like peas and lentils, was gathered”.

▪ They sailed northwards again from Mazava, this time towards Seilani. They followed the coast of Seilani in a
northwestern direction, ascending to 10 degrees latitude and seeing three small islands.

▪ They sailed westward for ten leagues until they came to three islets, where they anchored for the night. In the morning,
they sailed southwest for 12 leagues, down to a latitude of 10 and one-third degree. They entered a channel between
two islands, one called "Matan" and the other "Subu.“

▪ They sailed down that channel, then turned west and anchored at Subu's town (la villa), where they stayed for several
days, obtained provisions, and signed treaties with the local king.

▪ The town of Subu was located east-west of the islands of Suluan and Mazava. However, there were so many shallows
between Mazava and Subu that the boats couldn't go westward directly and had to go (as they did) in a roundabout way.

This must be noted that the location of Mazava in Albo's account corresponds to the location of Limasawa, which is
located at the southern tip of Leyte, 9 degrees 54'N. However, he did not mention the first mass, but only the planting of
the cross on a mountain-top

2. THE PIGAFETTA EVIDENCE

Antonio Pigafetta was a famous Italian traveler who studied navigation. A member of Magellan's expedition and
eyewitness to the events, especially the first mass. He was one of 18 survivors out of 240 who returned to Spain in 1522.

he kept a journal of events as their group traveled around the Philippines. The only difference is that Pigafetta's account is
more detailed and supported by evidence, including the date and location of the event.

a. Testimony of Pigafetta on the route of Magellan’s expedition

▪ Saturday, March 16, 1521 – Magellan’s expedition sighted "Zamal," a "high land" approximately 300 leagues west of
Ladrones (now Marianas) Island.

▪ Sunday, March 17 – landed on "another uninhabited island." They set up two tents for the crew's sick members and had
a sow slaughtered for them. The island's name was "Humunu" (Homonhon).

▪ Sunday, March 17 – Magellan named the entire archipelago the “Islands of Saint Lazarus,”

▪ Monday, March 18 – In the afternoon, they noticed a boat approaching them, which contained nine men. A gift
exchange was carried out.

▪ On the island of Homonhon, there were two springs of water. They discovered some hints that these islands were rich in
gold. As a result, Magellan renamed the island the "Watering Place of Good Omen" (Acquada la di bouni segnialli).

▪ Friday, March 22 – The natives returned at noon, in two boats, with food supplies.

▪ Magellan's expedition stayed at Homonhon for eight days, beginning on Sunday. March 17 to Monday, March 25.

▪ Monday, March 25 – The expedition weighed anchor and left the island of Homonhon in the afternoon. In ecclesiastical
calendar, this day was the feast-day of the Incarnatione feast of the Annunciation and therefore “Our Lady’s Day.” An
accident happened to Pigafetta: He fell into the water but was rescued. He attributed his narrow escape from the death
as grace obtained through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary on her feast-day.

▪ The expedition's route after leaving Homonhon was "toward the west southwest, between four Islands (Cenalo,
Hiunanghan, Ibusson, and Albarien." "Cenalo" is an Italian manuscript misspelling for what Pigafetta in his map calls
"Ceilon" and Albo calls "Seilani" (island of Leyte). Pigafetta mistook "hiunanghan" (a misspelling of Hinunangan) for a
separate island, but it is actually on the mainland of Leyte. Hibuson (Pigafetta's Ibusson) is an island located east of the
southern tip of Leyte.They left Homonhon, sailing westward towards Leyte, then southward, passing between the island
of Hibuson on their port side and Hiunangan Bay on their southboard, continuing southward, then turning westward to
"Mazaua.“

▪ Thursday, March 28 – In the morning of Holy Thursday, March 28, they anchored off an Island where the previous night
they had seen a light or a bonfire. That island "lies in a latitude of nine and two-thirds degrees north of the Arctic Pole
and a longitude of one hundred and sixty-two degrees south of the demarcation line." It is twenty-five leagues from
Acquada and is known as “Mazaua”.

▪ They stayed on Mazaua Island for days.

▪ Thursday, April 4 – they left Mazaua , bound for Cebu. Guided by the king of Mazaua who sailed there in his own boat.
They traveled through five islands (Ceylon, Bohol, Canighan, Baibai, and Gatigan).

▪ They sailed westward from Gatigan to the three islands of the Camotes Group (Poro, Pasihan, and Ponson), where the
Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of Mazaua to catch up with them. The Spanish ships were much faster than the
native balanghai, which piqued the king of Mazaua's interest.

▪ They sailed south from the Camotes Islands towards "Zubu.“

▪ Sunday, April 7 – at noon they entered the harbor of “Zubu” (Cebu). It had taken them three days to travel from Mazaua
to the Camotes Islands and then south to Cebu.

c. The Two Native Kings

The presence of two native kings confirmed evidence at Mazaua during Magellan's visit. The first was Mazaua's king, and
the second was Butud. Pigafetta's account of his seven days in Mazaua.

d. Pigafetta's account of his seven days in Mazaua.

▪ Thursday, March 28 – In the morning they anchored near an Island where they had seen a light the night before a small
boat (boloto) came with eight natives, to whom Magellan threw some trinkets as presents. The natives paddled away, but
two hours later two larger boats (balanghai) arrived, one of which housed the native king under a mat awning. Some of
the natives went up the Spanish ship at Magellan's invitation, but the native king remained seated in his boat. In the
afternoon, the Spanish ships weighed anchor and drew closer to shore, anchoring near the native king's village on Holy
Thursday.

▪ Friday, March 29 – Magellan sent his slave interpreter ashore in a small boat to ask the king if he could provide the
expedition with food supplies and to assure the king that they had come as friends, not enemies. In response, the king
himself arrived in a boat with six or eight men, climbed Magellan's ship, and the two men embraced. Another gift
exchange took place. The native king and his companions returned ashore, bringing two members of Magellan's
expedition as overnight guests. Pigafetta was one of the two.

▪ Saturday, March 30 – Pigafetta and his companion had spent the evening before feasting and drinking with the native
king and his son. Pigafetta lamented the fact that, despite the fact that it was Good Friday, they had to eat meat. At
Saturday, Pigafetta and his companion took leave of their hosts and returned to the ships.

▪ Sunday, March 31 – "Early in the morning, the last of March and Easter day," Magellan ordered the priest and some
men ashore to prepare for the Mass. Later that morning, Magellan arrived with fifty men, and Mass was celebrated,
followed by the veneration of a cross. Magellan and the Spaniards returned to the ship for lunch, but in the afternoon
they went ashore to plant the cross on the highest hill. The kings of Mazaua and Butuan were present at both the mass
and the cross-planting.

▪ Sunday, March 31 – On that same afternoon, while on the highest hill, Magellan asked the two kings which ports he
should go to in order to obtain more abundant supplies of food than were available on that Island. They replied that
there were three ports to choose from: Ceylon, Calagan and Zubu. Zubu was port with the most trade. Magellan said that
he wished to go to Zubu and leave the next morning. He asked for someone to guide him there. The kings responded that
the pilots were available "at any time."

▪ Monday, April 1 – Magellan sent men ashore to assist with the harvest, but no work was done that day because the two
kings were sleeping off the night before.

▪ Tuesday, April 2 and Wednesday, April 3 – harvesting work during the "next to days“.

▪ Thursday , April 4 – They leave the Mazaua, bound for Cebu.

e. An argument based on omission.

Confirmatory evidence from the Legazpi expedition: The 1971 expedition of naval historian Samuel Eliot Morison and
Colombian historian Mauricio Obregon, as well as the accounts of Spanish naval engineer IgnacioFernandez Vial and
merchant marine captain Jose Luis Ugarte, retraced the Magellan-Elcano voyage and concluded that Limasawa was the
site of the country's first Catholic mass, according to the NHCP's study.

Evidence for Butuan

1. The name of the place. Antonio Pigafetta's testimony is regarded as one of the primary sources. Although he referred
to the location as "Mazaua" in his accounts, some historians believe it is the "Masao" in Butuan. In addition, Limasawa
cannot be the exact location of the first mass because it has four syllables and begins with a different letter.

2. The route from Homonhon. According to the Pigafetta's accounts, the expedition traveled 20 to 25 leagues west
southwest from Homonhon, their first landing point, to the site of the first mass. If they had been on Limasawa Island,
the distance is only about 14.6 leagues, or one-half that length. Furthermore, Limasawa is separated from Homonhon by
the tip of Southern Leyte.
3. The latitude position. According to Francisco Albo and Antonio Pigafetta's accounts, you can find the location at 90
North latitude, and others at 9 2/3°. The latitude position eliminates Limasawa, because it is closer by 10° , and
strengthens the claim of Masao, Butuan, because it is exactly at 9 °.

4. The geographical features

a. The Bonfire- The explorers were drawn to the light present the night before they arrived at the shore. Now, "Masao" in
Butuanon means "bright," which could refer to the local tradition of cooking rice flakes over open fires to celebrate a
harvest. Limasawa, on the other hand, has no rice fields.

b. The Balanghai- It was mentioned on the Pigafetta's account that they stayed in the first kingdom. The King arrived at
their ship in a "Balanghai," and Pigafetta and his companion attended a party in a "Balanghai" with a local King. Today, in
Butuan City, you can visit the Balangay Site Museum, also known as the "Balanghai Shrine Museum."

c. Abundance of gold- According to Pigafetta's testimony on Magellan's route, they discovered some hints that the
islands were rich in gold, prompting Magellan to rename the island the "Watering Place of Good Omen.“. While in Albo's
logbook, golds were shown to them. Butuan is said to have gold, whereas Limasawa is said to have none.

Despite the fact that the evidence presented by using primary sources: Albo's and Pigafetta's accounts. Limasawa was
able to retain its status as the site of the First Easter Sunday Mass in 1521.

3. Summary of Albo and Pigafetta's evidence

▪ Through the south island of Samar, Magellan’s expedition has entered the Philippines and stayed for a week at
Homohonhon. They sailed westward towards Leyte and rounded the southern tip of Panaon Island where they anchored
off the eastern shore of Mazaua Island. Upon a week of staying, during which on Easter Sunday, they celebrated a mass
and planted a cross on highest hill’s summit.

▪ The described position of Mazaua Island and its latitude of nine and two-thirds degrees North clearly correspond to the
position and latitude of south of Leyte.

▪ Clearly from Mazaua, Magellan’s expedition sailed northwestwards through the Canigao Channel, then norther wards
parallel to this latter island, then sailed westward to Camotes Group and southwestwards to Cebu.

▪ In that itinerary, at no point did the Magellan expedition go to Butuan or any on the Mindanao Cost. It was said that
only after Magellan’s death did the survivors of the expedition did go to Mindanao.

4. Confirmatory evidence from the Legazpi expedition.

There is confirmatory evidence from the documents of the Legazpi expedition, which sailed into Philippine water in 1565,
forty-four years after Magellan. Legazpi and his pilots were anxious to visit was precisely Mazaua, and they inquired
about "Mazaua" from Camotuan and his companions, natives of the village of Canadian at Southeastern end of the island
of Leyte. Guided by these natives, the Legazpi ships rounded the island of "Panae" (Panaon), which was separated from
Leyte by a narrow strait, and anchored off "Mazaua". But they found the inhabitants to be hostile, apparently as a result
of Portuguese depredation are that had occurred in the fourdecade interval between the Legazpi and the Magellan
expeditions. From Mazaua they went to Camiguing which was visible from Mazaua and from there thy intended to go to
Butuan on the island of Vindanao but were driven instead by contrary winds to Bohol. The point seems clear that as
pilots of the Legazpi expedition understood it, Mazaua was an island near Leyte and Panaon, Butuan was on the island of
Mindanao. The two were entirely different places and in no wise identicalan's king or Rajah