Ty p e s o f

Historical
S o u rc e s
Types Of Historical Sources

2
Historians can get his sources, primary or secondary, from the following:
• Archival Material
Manuscripts and archives are primary sources, including business and personal
correspondence, diaries and journals, legal and financial documents, photographs, maps,
architectural drawings, objects, oral histories, computer tapes, and video and audio
cassettes. Some archival materials are published and available in print or online.
• Government Documents
Government documents provide evidence of activities, functions, and policies at all
government levels. For research that relates to the workings of government, government
documents are primary sources.
These documents include hearings and debates of legislative bodies; the official text of
laws, regulations and treaties; records of government expenditures and finances; and
statistical compilations of economic, demographic, and scientific data.
3
• Serials
Journals, magazines, and newspapers are serial publications that are
published on an ongoing basis.
Many scholarly journals in the sciences and social sciences include primary
source articles where the authors report on research they have undertaken.
Consequently, these papers may use the first person ("We observed…").
These articles usually follow a standard format with sections like
"Methods," "Results," and "Conclusion."
Serials may also include book reviews, editorials, and review articles.
Review articles summarize research on a particular topic, but they do not
present any new findings; therefore, they are considered secondary sources.
Their bibliographies, however, can be used to identify primary sources.
4
• Visual and Audio Materials
Visual materials such as maps, photographs, prints, graphic arts, and
original art forms can provide insights into how people viewed and/or
were viewed the world in which they existed.
Films, videos, TV programs, and digital recordings can be primary
sources. Documentaries, feature films, and TV news broadcasts can
provide insights into the fantasies, biases, political attitudes, and
material culture of the times in which they were created. Radio
broadcast recordings, oral histories, and the recorded music of a
particular era can also serve as primary source material

5
• Books
Most books are secondary sources, where authors reference
primary source materials and add their own analysis. “The
First Filipino” by Leon Ma. Guerrero is a biography of Jose
Rizal. If you are researching Jose Rizal, this book would be a
secondary source because the author is offering his views
about the hero.
Books can also function as primary sources. For example,
Jose Rizal’s own letters and essays would be primary
sources.
6
H i s t or i c al
Cr i t i c i s m
Historical Criticism

8
Historical Criticism
• The historian’s role in writing history, is to reiterate, and to provide
meanings to facts that he gathered from primary sources (facts
from manuscripts, documents) or those that have been gathered by
archaeologists or anthropologists (artifacts).
• He can only make conclusions and generalizations based on them. It
is therefore his duty to check on the authenticity of the sources
that are presented to him to be used as basis in writing history.
• Sources have to undergo doubting and therefore should be critically
tested for validity.
• There are two kinds of criticisms that a historian can use in the
process; these are: External and Internal Criticisms 9
External and Internal
Criticisms

10
A. External Criticism
• The ‘External Criticism’ covers the physical examinations
of sources like documents, manuscripts, books, pamphlets,
maps, inscriptions and monuments.
• In original documents it includes looking at the paper and
ink used whether or not it is within the same circa as the
content of the work. Oftentimes its more difficult to
establish the authenticity of manuscripts and records rather
than document simply because the printed document have
already been authenticated by the writer.
11
Elements Of External Criticism

12
• a. Authorship. The name of the author of the document usually provides
credence in the establishment of validity of a certain document. The
author’s name in itself can provided for the test of authenticity.
In cases of anonymous writings when the exact name of the author is not
known then the office that holds the record should also be taken into
consideration.
For example, if we are studying population records and we use documents
from civil registrar’s office then that will lead to the consideration that the
documents are authentic.

13
• b. Date and place of publication. The date of the document
including the time and place of publication should be properly
analyzed in order to establish its authenticity. Modern day
documents and publication have their date and place of
publication usually printed at the back of the title page.
However, for manuscripts there are usually no date and place of
publications indicated. In such cases, the historian should look for
dates mentioned within the manuscript or cross check with other
records.
Sometimes an analysis of the language used or the date of birth and
death of the author can also be used as basis for the establishment
of its true date.
14
• c. Textual errors. The historian should always be in the lookout for errors in
the text of documents and manuscripts. There are two kinds of errors in
documents unintentional or intentional.
Unintentional errors are mistakes that are caused by typist or scribes usually in
spelling, omitted words or phrases.
Intentional errors are often made when there is an effort to modify or supplement
existing records or original manuscript for personal intention or interest of the
record keeper or editor. In such cases, efforts should be made by the historian to
get the original document and compare or cross check with other related records
or documents.
Sometimes, the style of writing of the author can also be used to authenticate the
originality of the document. If the style of writing does not match the author’s
style of writing then the document is dubious.
15
• d. Meanings of words used. The meaning of words used
usually changes from generation to generation, therefore
the historian have to interpret the words used based on the
time when the document was made.
Also, there are instances when words mean differently in
different places. In this case, the historian have to take into
consideration the place and culture when the document was
made. He must be very careful in understanding the terms, if
not any misinterpretation will lead to historical
misunderstandings.

16
 B. Internal
Criticism
• Positive criticism refers to understanding of both literal and real meaning of words.
A historian therefore must be able to analyze and interpret the contents of documents in
their real meaning. Document contains the idea of the person who wrote or made the
evidences, therefore they should be understood within that context. Historians
should refrain from making their own conclusions so as not to convey their own
interpretation rather than the true meaning of the content.
• One important characteristic that a historian should possess is the capacity to doubt all
documents and facts when these are not yet subjected to authentication. The historian
should question the motive of the writer and question the accuracy of the document.
• Likewise, the historian should verify if the writer of the document has a first had
information or had experience the phenomena he wrote and how long the time elapsed
between the occurrence of the event and the time the document was written. In cases of
contradicting records, the historian should corroborate the facts from other claims or
documents. The truthfulness or veracity of the document should be established 17
 Issues and Problems in
Philippine Historiography
Philippine Historiography has underwent several changes
since the precolonial period until present. Alongside with
these changes, sprung the different issues and problems in
which it has affected our appreciation of Philippine
history itself.
At a larger part, Philippine history was originally written
and documented by foreign historians, in fact even at
present most primary chronicles are mostly written in
Spanish and English. This being the case, modern day
Filipino historian have put a lot of question on the
manner by which Philippine history was written.

19
A. Correcting the errors of published historical work
Since most of the primary sources were written in foreign language, errors in
translation have happened and have affected much the writing of history. There
was therefore the need to correct errors in publication.
B. Filling the gaps in Philippine History
There were very few anthropologists and archaeologist in the Philippines hence there
are still gaps in some accounts or parts of the Philippine history.
C. Reinterpretation of historical facts & events
Historical Revisionism is a practice in writing history in which historians reinterpret
views of causes and effects, decisions, explanations and evidences.
D. Rewriting History in the Filipino point of view
The biggest problem that was raised is the fact that writers were foreigners therefore
Philippine history was mostly written in a foreigner’s point of view and not on
the point of view of the Filipinos.

20
History as a western concept
and Kasaysayan as a Filipino
concept

21
History as a western concept
History and kasaysayan are always equated the same. It is founded on
the idea that both are studies of the past. However, for radical
Filipino historians, the two concepts are not synonymous.
History is a western concept introduced by our colonizers, particularly by
the Spaniards. “History was derived from the Greek word historia
which means “knowledge acquired through inquiry or investigation”.
As a discipline, it existed for 2,400 years. The term historia was then
adopted to classical Latin where it acquired a new definition.
Historia became known as the account of the part of a group of
people through written documents and historical evidence. It is a
must for traditional historians that unless a written document can
prove a certain historical event, then it cannot be considered as a
historical fact. 22
 “no document, no history”
With that methodology, radical Filipino historians posed several
questions as the mantra of “no document, no history” if its suits
the Philippine context. They point out that, in the case of the
Philippines, despite the fact that even before the colonizers came and
ancient Filipinos already have a writing system, most of them
narrated their past and story through communal songs, epics and
other traditions that they passed orally from a generation to another.
If the strict definition and philosophy of “history” as to recorded
documents is to be followed, then the way our ancestors narrate their
past and story will not be accounted for. Which is why also, the
claim that “there is no Philippine history before the colonizers
came” became prevalent despite the fact that in our own point of
view, we already have: narrated in a manner not accounted by the
methodology of “history” 23
Another point posed by Filipino historians as to the exclusivity of the methodology of
“history” is that “History accounts only recorded past.. that means it is only for
those who can write, those who are educated.”
So this begs the question, how about the “history” of those who cannot write or are
uneducated? Does this mean that “history” is only for a specific class of people?
This issue is very much evident as most of the historical writings only centered the lives
of important individuals like monarchs, heroes, saints, elite and nobilities.
History was also focused on writing about wars, revolutions and developmental
breakthroughs. The question now is “how about the story of ordinary farmers,
fishermen, old folk, peasant families and indigenous people or even the commoner
like you?” Restricting historical evidence as exclusively written is also discrimination
against other social classes who were not recorded in paper. Does the absence of written
documents about them mean that they are people of no history or past? Did they even
exist?
24
Debunking “Sa Aking Mga
Kabata” through Historical
criticism
1. Jose Rizal’s “ Sa Aking Mga Kabata”
• According to Dr. Nancy Kimuell Gabriel on her tesis
masterado “Timawa: Kahulugan, Kasaysayan at
Kabuluhan sa Lipunang Pilipino,” on UP Diliman, 2001
the poem shows falseness.
• Historian Ambeth Ocampo, National artist of the
Philippines and writer Virgilio S. Almario and others have
debunked Rizal's traditional authorship of the poem based
on the following:

26
a.) AUTHORSHIP
• No manuscript for Sa Aking Mga Kabatà written in Rizal's
handwriting exists. The poem supposedly wrote in 1869 where he was
only 8 years old then.
• A young revolutionary? Another questionable aspect of this poem is
the precocious social commentary of its alleged young author. The
poem contains some very mature insights for an eight-year-old boy –
the “stinky fish” line notwithstanding. There are some bold statements
that are just as much about freedom and nationhood as they are about
language.
• The language is too advanced even for an eight-year-old prodigy like
Jose Rizal.
27
b.)DATE AND PLACE OF PUBLICATION
• Rizal had 35 years to publish or assert
authorship. He did not. The poem was published
afterward.
• The earliest documented appearance of Sa Aking
Mga Kabata was in a book published in 1906,
almost ten years after Rizal’s death. Author
Hermenegildo Cruz presented it as an example of
modern naturalist Tagalog poetry in the book
“Kun Sino ang Kumathâ ng̃ “Florante” [The
Person who Composed “Florante”].

28
c.) TEXTUAL ERRORS
• In Rizal’s childhood they spelled words
with a “c” rather than “k.” Further, the
word “kalayaan” (freedom) is used
twice.(No manuscript EXIST)
d.)MEANINGS OF WORDS USED
• Kalayaan was not a common word in
1869 and there is irrefutable evidence
that Jose Rizal himself did not learn the
word until he was 25 years old. Rizal
first encountered the word at least by
1872 the years after the execution of
GOMBURZA.
• Naturally, if Rizal didn’t know the word kalayaan when he was 25 years old, he could not have
written a poem in which the word appears twice when he was only eight years old. Whichever
case is true, young Jose’s alleged use of the word kalayaan in 1869 is no less curious. Moreover,
even if kalayaan was a term known to some people in Bulakan, the fact that it did not appear in
Florante at Laura, the poem that Rizal consulted, is telling because it was written by the most
famous poet of Bulakan, Francisco (Balagtas) Baltazar.
• We know this because of a letter he wrote to his brother Paciano in 1886. Rizal had written a
Tagalog translation of Friedrich Schiller’s German play Wilhelm Tell and he wanted Paciano to
review it. He explained that he found it difficult to translate some of the concepts in the play.
“My Dear Brother,
There I’m sending you at last the translation of Wilhelm Tell by Schiller… I lacked many
words, for example, for the word Freiheit or liberty. The Tagalog word kaligtasan cannot be
used, because this means that formerly he was in prison, slavery, etc. I found in the translation
of Amor Patrio the noun malayà, kalayahan that Marcelo del Pilar uses. In the only Tagalog
book I have – Florante – I don’t find an equivalent noun.”

30
Content and Contextual Analysis
Groupings
1. “First Voyage Around the World by Magellan” by Antonio
Pigafetta
2. “Customs of the Tagalogs” by Juan de Plasencia
3. “Kartilya ng Katipunan” by Emilio Jacinto
4. “Declaration of Philippine Independence” by Ambrosio
Rianzares-Bautista

31