Mindanao State University

College of Social Sciences and Humanities

Marawi City 9700, Philippines

HISTORY DEPARTMENT

GEC105- READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

MODULE 1: INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY: Definition, Elements, Nature and Importance

LEARNING COURSE OUTCOMES

1. Understand the definition, nature, and domain of History;

2. Validate the relevance of History;
3. Appreciate the importance of History in the social and national life in the Philippines; and
4. Comprehend the distinction between History as a western concept and Kasaysayan as a Filipino concept.

CONTENT

1. Definition and etymology of history

 History (from the Greek word Historia which means "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 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.

2. 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.

I. Issues and Problems in Philippine Historiography 

Historiography refers to the study of history itself. It 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. Basically, it studies how history is written.

Philippine Historiography has undergone 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. 

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 account 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. 

II. History as a western concept and Kasaysayan as a Filipino 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 as a western concept 

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 past 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.
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" 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? Lastly, from the very
word "history. Filipino historians noticed it being gender-biased towards male; how the term is heavily influenced by patriarchy.
"HIStory"... how about "HERstory". This lends to the fact why much of historical writings are dedicated to great men, powerful and
dominant male leaders. 

Kasaysayan as a Filipino concept The Pantayong Pananaw definition of kasaysayan is "salaysay na nagsalaysay ng mga bagay na
may saysay para sa sinasalysayang grupo o salinlahi". The definition gives emphasis to the root of kasaysayan which is "saysay"
which means significant. Under such definition, it seeks to address some of the issues as regards the western concept of history and
suit the paradigm of such discipline in the Filipino context and culture. 

Kasaysayan, unlike history, is not only bound by written documents but as well as oral traditions like communal songs, legends, epics
and the like as mentioned earlier were the prevalent modes on how the ancient Filipinos and most of the indigenous people who still
exist up this day use as a mode of narrating their past and story. Oral traditions in the Philippine context are important since they also
capture the emerging values, principles and ideology of certain group of people at a particular time. Example of this is the legend of
"Malakas and Maganda of the Tagalogs. It is the Filipino version of the creation story in the bible. The legend tells that men and
women sprung at the same time
Adam and Eve, where Adam, the man, was first created and women through Eve as their representation was created by God from a
body part of Adam. What do these stories tell us? From our "Malakas and Maganda" legend, we can see that our Filipino ancestors
have a strong value for gender equality. Men and women have equal status in their society. While from the classic story of Adam and
Eve, we can deduce that it is still heavily influence by patriarchy or the idea that men are more dominant than women. 

As to the inclusivity of the concept of kasaysayan, it advocates the philosophy of "People's History" or "History from Below".
According to E.P Thompson, "people's history" or "history from below" is a type of historical narrative which attempts to account for
historical events from the perspective of common people rather than leaders. There is an emphasis on disenfranchised, the
oppressed, the poor, the nonconformists, and otherwise marginal groups. Unlike the concept of "history which values the philosophy
of "history from above".

III. Bipartite View vis-à-vis Tripartite View of Philippine History 

Bipartite View of Philippine History 

For many years and sadly some still believe it until now, the Spaniards made us believe that there was no civilization in Philippines.
They made us think that early Filipino people were barbaric and uneducated. They have assimilated upon the Filipinos that it was
them who brought civilization and progress to us. This is known as the Bipartite View of Philippine History. In such view, Philippine
History can be only viewed into two epochs. The first is the "Pre-Hispanic period characterized as the time prior to the coming of the
Spaniards where the condition of the Philippines is seen of uncivilized society and barbaric people. The second epoch is the
"Hispanic period characterized as time of the coming of the Spaniards seen as the advent of civilizing influences from them. The
Bipartite View of Philippine History made us think that we owe our civilization to the Spaniards

IV. Pantayong Pananaw and other Pananaw Pangkasaysayan 

In recent times, truly Filipino historians have occurred and tried to write Philippine History in the Filipino point of Vie w. One of these
writers was Professor Zeus A. Salazar of the University of the Philippines who saw the relevance of the Filipino point of view in
historical interpretation. In order to introduce indigenization, he introduced the concept of "Pantayong Pananaw* (from us, for us).
Generally, this means that Philippine History is better written in the point of view of the Filipinos. 
Pantayong Pananaw .
Only few of our historical documents are written in Filipino or native language. Most of them are written in English and Spanish. This
is due to the fact that the elite Filipinos who studied abroad during the Spanish and American era took the responsibility to write our
history in English or other foreign language. What was taught to them was to write history in a foreign perspective. They wrote for
foreigners to understand our history but not for their fellow Filipino who mostly do not understand the medium that they used.
According to Zeus Salazar, to wit: 

"Ang buod ng pantayong pananaw ay nasa panloob na pagkakaugnay-ugnay at paguugnay ng mga katangian, halagahin,
kaalaman, karunungan, hangarin, kaugalian, pag-aasal at karanasan ng isang kabuuang pangkalinangan -- kabuuang
nababalot sa, at ipinapahayag sa pamamagitan ng isang wika; ibig sabihin, sa loob ng isang nagsasariling
talastasan/diskursong pangkalinangan o pangkabihasnan. Isang reyalidad ito sa loob ng alin mang grupong
etnolingguwistikong may kabuuan at kakanyahan, sa atin at sa ibang dako man ng mundo."

Philippine history should be written and taught in Filipino or ethnolinguistic language in the Philippines because it is only through our
own language that we are able to understand, appreciate and be able to connect to our own history. Each culture is different and
language serve as the channel for the uniqueness of one's culture. Through the guiding philosophy of Pantayong Pananaw,
Philippine historiography will be seen from point of view of Filipinos and addressed directly to the Filipinos.

Pangkaming Pananaw 

Historical perspective in which Philippine history is written by Filipinos in foreign language and intended for to be read by foreigners
to understand our history in our point of view. Example of this writers are the Propagandist in their La Solidaridad. The propagandist
are Filipinos but they used Spanish to write against the Spaniards. Often, this historical perspective is used to correct or argue
against false accounts written by foreigners. Pangkayong Pananaw Historical perspective in which Philippine history is written by
foreigner in a foreign language as well but it is meant to be addressed or directed to Filipinos as audience. 

Pansilang Pananaw 
Historical perspective in which Philippine history is written by foreigners in a foreign language as well and is intended to be read and
understood by their fellow foreigners. 

The scholars of Pantayong Pananaw or the Bagong kasaysayan advocates this guiding philosophy as we are in need of a more
comprehensive collection of historical accounts because it should be understood by our own people. Individual histories of ethnic
groups are independent of each other but are all still part of the whole history of the Philippines a.ka. the concept of ethnohistory. The
 Pantayong Pananaw seeks to address the issues and problems in our Philippine historiography and the way Philippine history
subjects are taught in our educational system. 

3. Elements of History

A. The Historian. This refers to the person writing the history.

B. Place. The location where the history was written

C. Period. Refers to the context of the time when the history was written.

D. Sources. Refers to the basis of claims or analysis of the historian such as documents, written or oral accounts.

4. Nature of History as an academic discipline

A. 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.

B. 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.

C. 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. 
 D. 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. 

E. 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. 

5. 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 a
strong basis for providing answers for problems that pervades at present.

6. 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.
GUIDE QUESTIONS

1. What is History? How is your understanding of History different from what is explained in this module?
2. How did History as a discipline evolve? Did the different perspectives of studying and writing history change how
you see history books that you read?

SUGGESTED ACTIVITY

Pause for a few minutes and think about or reflect on your past. Has your past influenced you in one way or
another? How does your past shape your identity and behavior? Explain.

(Note: For online classroom, activity should be posted separately in google classroom.)
*Additional reading materials or videos are posted in google classroom or available at history department at your perusal.

SUGGESTED SCORING RUBRIC

Content and Relevance - 50%

Originality - 30%

Structure and Form - 20%

Syntax - 5%

Clarity of Ideas - 5

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOTAL 100%
References:
1. Agoncillo, Teodoro. History of the Filipino People. Eighth Edition. Quezon City: C& E Publishing, 1990. (pp. 184-187). 

2. Gottschalk, Luis. Understanding History: A Primer of Historical Method. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1950. (pp. 41- 61; 117-170). 

3. Scott, William Henry Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History. Manila: University of Santo Tomas Press, Manila, 1968.
(pp. 90-135)

4. Candelaria, John Lee. Readings in Philippine History. First Edition. Rex Book Store, 2018.

5. Salazar, Zeus. "A Legacy of the Propaganda: The Tripartite View of Philippine History," in https://www.wheninmanila.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/06/A-Legacy-of-the-Propaganda The-Tripartite-View-of-Phil-History.pdf (pp 1-13) 

8. Salazar, Zeus." Ang Pantayong Pananaw: Bilang Diskursong Pangkabihasnan," in https://journals.upd.edu.ph/index.php/diwf/article/view/4949

(pp 1-22)