INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY: DEFINITION,
NATURE, METHODOLOGY, AND IMPORTANCE
Rationale:
Module 1 introduces to students the discipline of History
and its domain. The students are expected to understand
the methodology of History and appreciate its
importance.
Practically, this module aims to develop student’s skill in
evaluating historical sources for their credibility,
authenticity, and provenance, as well as analyzing the
context, content, and perspective of different kinds of
sources, especially in this times of historical revisionism
and post-truth.
Instructions to The User:
The user is to study this module at his own pace within
the time frame set by the instructor. Check the OBTL
syllabus for guidance.
Video links for subtopics are also provided in this
module.
References, Supplemental and Additional readings are
also given for further understanding and appreciation of
the lesson.
Self-Check Test are also available for student’s self-
assessment. Respective instructors may ask the students
to submit answers via agreed platforms
I. Introduction to History
A. Etymology and Definition
B. Historiography
C. Elements
D. Nature
E. Why Do We Study History (Importance)
F. History in relation with other social sciences
II. Sources in History
A. Primary
B. Secondary
C. Tertiary
D. Types of historical sources
III. Historical Criticism
A. External
B. Internal
C. Debunking “Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “Code
of Kalantiaw” through Historical Criticism
Learning Objectives
1. Comprehend the definition, nature, methodology and
domain of History.
2. Appreciate the importance of History.
3. Distinguish between primary and secondary sources.
4. Evaluate sources for their credibility, authenticity,
and provenance 5.
5. Validate sources through historical criticism.
I. Introduction to History
o Why do people do the things we do?
o How can we explain human behavior?
o Under what circumstances do people take certain
actions, and in what circumstances do they take
surprising actions?
One can derive answers for these questions from an
academic discipline known as History. By examining
past events of humans, we can compare their situations
to different periods and draw conclusions as to what we
can learn from these past events. Lessons learned from
these past events can provide understanding of present
day phenomenon. We look at the past, but we do so to
learn about people today. By studying history, we are
able to know and understand the story of our nation,
trace our roots and identity, find lessons from the past
that will address problems of today and be able to use
these to move forward to the future. “Today’s events
are tomorrow’s history,” as the saying goes.
A. Etymology and Definition
History (from the Greek word Historie or Historia
which means “learning, inquiry and or investigation”) is
a branch of the Social Sciences that deals with the
systematic study of significant past, a branch of
knowledge that records and explains past events and
which concerns people and human nature.
Being a branch of the social sciences, History centers on
the study of people and the society. Which is why, the
people are considered as the focal point in the study of
history. The definition emphasizes that it is a
“systematic” study. This means that history as a
discipline follows a methodology in order to establish
and be able to validate facts and evidences. The
definition mentions of “significant” past as the subject
matter of history. By “significant past” it entails that
only past events which has affected the political,
cultural, social and economic aspects of the society or of
the lives of the people, are considered part of history. It
does not follow that everything that happened in the past
is considered part of Philippine History i.e. On June 14,
2001, Pedro threw a ball of paper in the trashcan. That is
a past event but cannot be considered as part of
Philippine History. Consistently, the definition of history
only covers those which are “recorded” or “written”
events. It is important to note, that “history” is a western
concept which failed to account unrecorded or unwritten
sources of history like oral traditions in the case of the
Philippines. These issues regarding the western concept
of “history” and our Filipino concept of “kasaysayan”
will be further tackled in our next module.
B. Historiography
Historiography on the other hand refers to the study of
history itself. Historiography analyzes who is the
history writer, the motives of the writer, the sources of
the writer, theories applied and other historical
methods. It also analyzes the context when the history
was written.
Page 1 of 7

C. Elements of History
o The Historian. This refers to the person writing the
history.
o Place. The location where the history was written
o Period. Refers to the context of the time when the
history was written.
o Sources. Refers to the basis of claims or analysis of
the historian such as documents, written or oral
accounts.
D. Nature of History as an Academic Discipline
History has no subject matter of its own. Of course, the
subject matter of history covers all the persons and all
events that have happened in the past. It is actually very
broad since it does cover everything that has happened
in the society including all aspects from political,
economic social, culture etc.
History synthesizes knowledge from other fields. Since
it covers all phenomena, History as a branch of the
Social Sciences analyzes the relations of different
events, their cause and effects using also the knowledge
used in other fields of the Social Sciences such as
Anthropology, Sociology, Economics etc.
History illuminates pieces of the past. History provides
for explanations of things that happened in the past. By
looking at relationships of different events and
phenomena, it provides explanations for seemingly
unexplainable gaps.
History is constantly changing. Since claims to
historical facts are based on personal accounts,
documents and artifacts, a historian makes an analysis
based only on available sources of data. The historian
cannot conclude something which is baseless. Unlike
other Social Sciences which can gather actual and real
time data or conduct experiments to test their hypothesis,
historians have to rely on what is available. Therefore,
when new data are discovered, previous historical
accounts can be changed.
History sheds light to truth. Since a historian constantly
write about previous phenomena using historical sources
as basis, all claims therefore supports only the truth base
on the data available. This however does not preclude
the fact that a historian uses also unwritten sources such
as oral accounts and traditions.
E. Importance of the Study of History
The study of History is important because it provides us
with the capacity to analyze previous events and
phenomena which therefore will provide us with proper
basis on how to view the present and the future. This
being the case history will provide is with a strong basis
for providing answers for problems that pervades at
present. A lot of people in our modern day society
would say that history is no longer important. That the
study of history is outdated already.
However, our historical view will in itself provide us
with the manner by which we view the present and how
we prepare for the future.
According to E. Kent Rogers, we study History because
of the following:
First, “to know more about the roots of our current
culture”. This being the case history will provide us
with the basis by which we can understand better
different cultural institutions and constructs. For
example, why is it that in the modern-day Philippines a
lot of Filipinos value having white complexion when in
fact we are naturally brown skinned? An analysis of our
historical background will of course reveal that because
we have been colonized by white complexioned people
particularly the Spaniards and Americans, having white
skin is viewed as somewhat of higher status than the
brown skinned;
Second, “to learn about human nature by looking at
trends that repeat through history” and “learn about
mistakes of those who have gone before us”. History
deals with analysis therefore, by studying different
trends that happened before this could provide us with a
clear analysis of causes of events that happened. If the
result of the event is negative, then we could navigate
another path to seek for a better state of affairs. On the
other hand, if the result of the events is positive then we
can recommend to repeat it to get the same result. Either
way, by analyzing historical facts, we can use the result
in decision making or future planning
F. History in Relation with other Social Sciences
Archaeology is scientific study of material remains of
past human life and activities as stated by Merriam and
Webster. Archaeologists usually excavates the earth in
search of artifacts. Through investigations of artifacts
such as pottery, weapons, jewelry etc., the historian can
draw important analysis and interpretation from them
and make a description of the lives and culture of the
people that owned the artifacts.
Another field of the social sciences that provides
relevant input to History is Anthropology.
Anthropology is the study of human beings and their
ancestors through time and space and in relation to
physical character, environmental and social relations,
and culture (Merriam and Webster). The cultural
analysis of ancestors of man will also provide for
sources of historical data that the Historian can make use
in writing history.
Questions to Ponder:
o History is a western concept while kasaysayan is a
Filipino concept. Are the two concepts completely
the same?
o It is consistent that the definition of history studies
only recorded past. Is this the same with
kasaysayan?
o How does history link the past, present, and future?
o Is history just a matter of chronology?
Page 2 of 7
II. Sources of History
Historians study the sources that the past has left
behind. No statement about the past can carry conviction
unless it can be supported by reference to the historical
sources, the evidence upon which historians base their
ideas and interpretations. Historians inevitably spend a
lot of time reading each other’s writings, but the real
historical work is done – and the real enjoyment is to be
had – in studying the sources, the actual ‘stuff’ of history
(University of Cambridge Website).
Historical evidences are important proof of the
truthfulness of the past. In the aim towards objectivity
of the writing of history, these evidences become the
sources of historical data.
“Sources”/ “Batis”/ “Sanggunian” refers to the basis
of claims or analysis of the historian. They serve as the
evidences utilized in the study of history.
In history, sources are classified mainly into:
Primary and Secondary Sources. Primary and
secondary sources form the cornerstones of historical
research. A modern-day work of history is essentially a
description and interpretation of primary sources, along
with commentary of secondary sources, both using them
in reference to the subject matter at hand, and agreeing
and disagreeing with them.
A. Primary Sources
A primary source provides direct or firsthand evidence
about an event, object, person, or work of art. These are
the evidences by eyewitnesses or created by people who
experienced the said event or phenomena. The
historian’s responsibility is to organize the primary
sources into a coherent account to become secondary
source.
In effect, a primary source is direct source of historical
information dating from the period in question.
o A baptismal register of 1866 in the parish of
Concepcion, Tarlac would be a primary source about
Spanish colonial period in Philippine History.
o A Philippine coin minted in 1910 would be a
primary source about the American colonial period.
o A newspaper printed in 1943 would be a primary
source from the Japanese period.
Primary sources include historical and legal
documents, eyewitness accounts, results of experiments,
statistical data, pieces of creative writing, audio and
video recordings, speeches, and art objects. Interviews,
surveys, fieldwork, and Internet communications via
email, blogs, and newsgroups are also primary sources.
In the natural and social sciences, primary sources are
often empirical studies—research where an experiment
was performed or a direct observation was made. The
results of empirical studies are typically found in
scholarly articles or papers delivered at conferences.
B. Secondary Sources
Secondary sources, on the other hand, are interpretations
of history. They describe, discuss, interpret, comment
upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and process primary
sources. These are the products of people or writers
who were not part of the event or phenomena.
One can consider them as history books, although this is
a bit misleading, as secondary sources can include
articles, movies, audio recordings, or any other source
of media that interprets history.
Teodoro hihistor’s Malolos: The Crisis of The
Republic, though deals with the events of 1899 is a
secondary source because it interprets facts of the past;
though dealing with the time-frame, it is not from the
period in question.
Secondary source materials can be articles in
newspapers or popular magazines, book or movie
reviews, or articles found in scholarly journals that
discuss or evaluate someone else's original research.
C. Tertiary Sources
Others cite, another classification, the Tertiary Sources.
Tertiary sources contain information that has been
compiled from primary and secondary sources. Tertiary
sources include almanacs, chronologies, dictionaries
and encyclopedias, directories, guidebooks, indexes,
abstracts, manuals, and textbooks.
D. Types of Historical Sources
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. 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.
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.
Page 3 of 7
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.
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.
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.
III. Historical Criticism
The historian’s role in writing history, to reiterate, is 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
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.
Following are the elements that have to be taken into
consideration in doing validation:
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.
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.
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.
Meanings of Words Used. The meaning of words used
usually changes from generation to generation, therefore
the historian has 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 has 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.
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
Page 4 of 7
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
firsthand 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.
C. Debunking “Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and “The Code
of Kalantiaw” 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.
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.
o 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 precocious even for an eight-year-
old prodigy like Jose Rizal.
DATE AND PLACE OF PUBLICATION. The poem
was first published in 1906, a decade after his death, in a
book authored by the poet Hermenigildo Cruz.
o Rizal had 35 years to publish or assert authorship.
He did not. The poem was published posthumously.
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)
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.
o The historian Zeus Salazar, however, refuted the
claims of Andrade and Yanga in his essay Ang
Kartilya ni Emilio Jacinto in 1999. He maintained
that the word laya and its various conjugations
“were already a part of Tagalog vocabulary at that
time [and] therefore, could not have been invented
by anybody.” However, he also wrote,
“Laya/calayaan was not yet needed in writing
before 1864 and even later, especially since
timawa/catimaoan was still widely used back then
as meaning ‘free/freedom.” Evidently, Rizal had
not encountered the word kalayaan until he saw it in
Marcelo H. del Pilar’s Pag-ibig sa Tinubuang
Lupa (Love for the Native Land), which was his
Tagalog translation of Rizal’s own Spanish essay,
Amor Patrio. 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. Jose 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.”
2. The Code of Kalantiaw
William Henry Scott, examined the Pre-Hispanic history
of the Philippines. Scott raised issues on the existence of
the Code of Kalantiaw, specifically on:
LACK OF HISTORICAL EVIDENCE
o No written/ pictorial documents from that time in
Philippine history.
o No documents from other countries that mentions
Kalantiaw.
LACK OF EVIDENCE FOR A KALANTIAW
LEGEND
o No recorded Filipino legend about Kalantiaw other
than the doubtful Pavon manuscripts before the 20th
century.
o Historian Diego Alba looked for Kalantiaw in local
folklore but found none.
DOUBTFUL PAVON MANUSCRIPTS
Page 5 of 7
o Two inconsistent versions on how Jose Marco Historiography
obtained the manuscripts.
o Study of history itself.
o Looters and Cook Stories
o Mistakes in the Pavon manuscripts. Elements
Questions to Ponder:  Historians
 Place
o Does it always follow that primary sources should
 Time
be given more weight than secondary sources?  Source
o What are the significance of understanding sources o Motives, Hang-ups, Significants, Hugots
and historical criticism? o Madalas gusto nating malaman kung bakit nagging
Key Points ganito ang kwento, kesa malaman ang buong
kwento. Yung “kung ako kaya nandun”.
History is a branch of the Social Sciences that deals with
the systematic study of SIGNIFICANT PAST, a branch Nature
of knowledge that records and explains past events and
1) Has no subject of its own. Covers all the person
which concerns people and human nature.
and all events that have happened in the past. Very
History has no subject matter of its own. It synthesizes broad. Covers all events. Covers everything. No
knowledge from many fields. It illuminates pieces of the demarcation.
past. It constantly changing. It is subjective and it 2) Synthesizes knowledge form other fields.
searches for the truth. Relationship of all events. Cause and effect.
3) Illuminates pieces from the past. Explains how
Historiography refers to the study of history itself. It and why. Sheds light to the darkness.
analyzes who is the history writer, the motives of the 4) Constantly Changing. Personal accounts,
writer, the sources of the writer, theories applied and availability of sources. Different interpretations.
other historical methods. It also analyzes the context
when the history was written. Importance of History

The elements of history are: the historian, place, period o Provide basis on how to act on present and future.
and sources. o To grow and develop.
o To know more about our identity, culture, and roots.
The focal point in the study of history are the people and
its nature. History being a branch of social science. Sources
There are bountiful reasons why we have to learn o Primary
history. o Important Element
Other fields of knowledge such as Archaeology, o Facts Only
Anthropology, Sociology, Economics, Politics are o Batis
important in the study of history. o Sanggunian
o Sandalan
History being a discipline follows a methodology in
order to establish facts or evidences. Evidences in Primary Sources
history are known as sources. They can be primary,
Definition:
secondary or tertiary.
o Raw Data
In order to validate these sources, they must undergo
o Original sources of information before it has been
Historical Criticism, first is external then internal.
analyzed.
Jose Rizal’s poem “Sa Aking Mga Kabata” and the
alleged pre-colonial written code “The Code of Characteristics:
Kalantiaw” were debunked through historical criticism. o Firsthand Observations
SOURCE: POWERPOINT o Contemporary Accounts of Events
o Viewpoints at The Time
History – Etymology and Definition
Examples:
o Historie or Historia (Greek word) – To inquire or
investigate or search. o Interviews
o Systematic Recording of Significant Past o Speeches
o Diaries
o Birth Certificates
Kasaysayan
o Journal Articles (Science)
o Pagsasalaysay ng mananalaysay sa mga bagay na o Newspaper Articles Written at the Time
may saysay sa pinagsasalaysayang grupo o tao.
Secondary Sources
o Cultural, Social, Politcal, Economic.
Page 6 of 7
Definition:
o Sources that analyze or interpret primary data. They
do not offer new evidence.
Characteristics:
o Interpretations of Information
o Written After the Event
o Offer Review or Critique

Examples:
o Biographies
o Journal Articles
o Textbooks
o Commentaries
o Editorials
o Literary Criticisms

Tertiary Sources
Definition:
o Sources that compile data on a particular topic.

Characteristics:
o Collection or list of primary and secondary sources.
o Reference Works
o Finding Tools for Sources

Examples:
o Encyclopedias
o Bibliographies
o Abstracts
o Indexes
o Literature Reviews
o Library Catalogs
o Databases

Page 7 of 7