Comparative Analysis of Robert B.
Fox and William Henry Scott on the Tabon Caves
1. Author's Background:
Primary Source
Robert B. Fox: Fox was an American anthropologist and archaeologist who conducted
extensive fieldwork in the Philippines. He was particularly known for his work with the Tabon
Caves, directly leading the excavations. His background was deeply rooted in hands-on
archaeological research and analysis.
Secondary Source
William Henry Scott: Scott was a historian and lay missionary with a profound understanding
of Philippine history and culture. He relied heavily on documentary research and analysis of
existing historical sources. His background was more academic and focused on interpreting
historical narratives.
2. Account Written:
Primary Source
Fox: His account is a detailed, firsthand report of the archaeological exploration and excavation
of the Tabon Caves. It's written in a style that reflects scientific observation and data
presentation, typical of an archaeological report.
Secondary Source
Scott: Scott's work provides a broader historical context using various sources, including
archaeological findings like those from Tabon, but it's not a direct excavation report. His writing
is more interpretative, aiming to synthesize information for a historical understanding of the
prehispanic Philippines.
3. Type of Evidence/s:
Primary Source
Fox: Primarily archaeological evidence – fossil remains (including the Tabon Man), tools,
artifacts, and stratigraphic data from the excavation.
Secondary Source
Scott: A combination of archaeological evidence (including Fox's work), early written accounts
(like Chinese chronicles), linguistic studies, and ethnographic data.
4. Mention of Date:
Primary Source
Fox: Provides specific dates related to the excavation process and the estimated age of the
findings based on radiocarbon dating and stratigraphic analysis.
Secondary Source
Scott: Mentions dates within a broader historical timeline, discussing the Tabon findings in
relation to other periods and events in prehispanic Philippine history.
5. Mention of Place:
Primary Source
Fox: Focuses specifically on the Tabon Caves on Palawan Island, providing detailed descriptions
of the location and the various caves within the complex.
Secondary Source
Scott: Mentions Tabon Caves as one of the significant sites contributing to our understanding of
prehispanic Philippines, but within a wider geographical discussion of the archipelago.
6. Sequencing of Event:
Primary Source
Fox: Presents a chronological sequence of the excavation, the discoveries made, and the analysis
of the findings. The narrative follows the progress of the archaeological work.
Secondary Source
Scott: Sequences events within a historical narrative, placing the Tabon findings in the context
of the broader timeline of prehispanic Philippine development.
7. Difference of the Two Accounts:
Fox's account is primary and direct, focusing on the "what" and "how" of the Tabon Caves'
discovery. It's a factual report from the field.
Scott's account is secondary and interpretive, focusing on the "why" and "what does it mean"
of the Tabon findings within the larger context of Philippine history. He uses Fox's work as a
source to build a broader historical narrative.
My Analysis of the Accounts:
Reading both Fox and Scott provides a well-rounded view of the Tabon Caves. Fox gives us the
raw data, the tangible evidence of early human presence in the Philippines. It's like being on the
excavation site, seeing the layers of earth and the unearthed artifacts.
Scott, on the other hand, takes that data and weaves it into a story. He helps us understand the
significance of the Tabon findings in the grand scheme of Philippine history. He connects the
dots, showing how the Tabon Man and the artifacts fit into our understanding of early human
migration and the development of culture in the archipelago.
It's clear that these two accounts complement each other. Fox's work is essential for the factual
basis, while Scott's work provides the historical context and interpretation. Without Fox, we
wouldn't have the primary evidence; without Scott, we might not fully grasp its significance.
This assignment has made me realize how important it is to look at history from different
perspectives. Primary sources give us the raw data, but secondary sources help us make sense of
it all. It's like having puzzle pieces – Fox gives us the pieces, and Scott helps us put them
together to see the bigger picture.
