In writing history, historians have to read through various sources of information to gather data

and facts on the topic, figure or event they are focusing on. There are different sources of history
in which historians use such as written sources like a scripture, textbook, articles, etc. Such as
that of the hieroglyphics of Egypt, epigraphy which is the study of inscriptions engraved upon
various surfaces such as stone, wood, clay tablets, wax, metals or any surface. Buildings or
monuments are also sources as they can have an idea of the daily lives of the people during that
time through the remains in the houses, infrastructure and alike. Artefact can also be seen inside
building, monuments or infrastructures, these can be pottery, utensils, tools, and jewelry. And
bones or remains as it gives out the gender, age, health, diet and more that would give us an idea
of their lives were like since some societies didn’t have written sources or other things.

The first source is the primary source is a firsthand document or material that was from that
period of time or ‘raw materials of history’ and as valuable as they are, we can’t assume that
everything that is depicted there is true since they are made by people in which they are written
from their perspective thus can have a bias message or opinion. Which is why it is best to be
critical in reading them and cross-examine the sources gathered on the same topic to see the
difference between the authors point of views and have more information. Example of a primary
sources are original documents (diaries, speeches, manuscripts, etc.), creative works (art works,
novels, poetry, music, etc.), relics and artifacts (pottery, decorative arts, clothing, buildings, etc.)
Second, is the secondary source, these can be accumulated data or information about a topic,
figure or event and is close to having every information needed by a historian regarding the
topic, figure or event. However, similar to the primary source these are made by people in which
the information or data in these secondary sources could’ve been hand-picked and are bound to
have been written with bias and own interpretation that can sway the historian or people reading
them and so, it is important to cross-examine in order to assess each of the source’s strength and
weakness on the topic. Example of a secondary source is bibliographies, essays. commentaries,
etc. Lastly, tertiary sources are simply summarized or synthesized research on a secondary
source like a textbook or a reference book. Among the three sources primary source is the most
important source of history because it is the raw data that historians are able to use in analyzing
historical events, figures, or time periods. It gives historians the perspectives of those who
participated in a historical event and they give historians a peek into history of that time. As I
stated before we have to be critical in viewing these sources in order to ensure that the
information and data, we get isn’t biased and one-sided there are various ways in fool proofing
and testing the sources of history. Cross-checking certain claims from a source through other
sources like material evidence or archaeological evidence. Just like there is the Scientific method
for scientific theories and testing hypothesis there’s Historical Method in which the first step is
source criticism that follows the checklist in checking a source.

These are:

1. When was the source, written or unwritten, produced (date)?

2. Where was it produced (localization)?
3. By whom was it produced (authorship)?
4. From what pre-existing material was it produced (analysis)?
5. In what original form was it produced (integrity)?
6. What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)?

Higher criticism are the first four questions; lower criticism is the fifth; and, together, external
criticism. The sixth and final inquiry about a source is called internal criticism. This makes up
the source criticism that questions the sources of history by historians. Historical Reasoning
involves drawing the best possible logical conclusion from the results of the Source Criticism.
As there are three aspects to it, argument to best explanation, statistical inference and argument
from analogy. In each aspect there are conditions that must be followed or seen in the results of
the Source Criticism.

In the context of the Philippine History, after the People Power Revolution many articles,
testimonies and even figures present during that time and so primary sources are necessary since
the perspective of the soldiers, nuns and people involved at that time had different perspective,
thoughts, opinions and to know the reason why the soldiers dropped their weapons and joined in
and what led the nuns, or overall everyone involved to face head-on despite the military pointing
weapons in front of them can’t be simply be taken in through a secondary source. In writing the
event of the assassination of Benigno Aquino Jr. you can use a secondary source as rather than
evidence you can see the different opinions, theories and thoughts of people behind the
assassination, why he was assassinated and more. It is viable to use secondary sources when you
want to focus on commentary or discussion of evidence regarding it rather than a documentary
for if it were a documentary you have to use a primary source otherwise it will be considered
unreliable.