Appendix

Learning Resource Materials

I
HISTORY AND HISTORICAL METHODOLOGY

Target Outcomes

At the end of the course, the learners will be able:

1. To explain the meaning of history as an academic discipline and to be familiar with the underlying
philosophy and methodology of the discipline;
2. To apply the knowledge in historical methodology and philosophy in assessing and analyzing existing
historical narratives;
3. To critically examine and assess the value of historical evidences and sources
4. To familiarize oneself with the primary documents in different historical periods of the Philippines;
5. To learn history through primary sources; and
6. To properly interpret primary sources through looking at the content and context of the document.

Abstraction

I. MEANING AND RELEVANCE OF HISTORY

DEFINITION OF HISTORY
Derived from the Greek word “historia” which means “knowledge acquired through inquiry or
investigation”,
Also known as the study of the past events,
Is the account of the past of a person or group of people through written documents and historical
evidences,
History also focused on writing about wars, revolutions, and other important breakthroughs

Individuals who write about history are called HISTORIANS

- They undertake arduous historical research to come up with a meaningful and organized rebuilding of
the past.
- They seek to understand the present by examining what went before.

NO DOCUMENT, NO HISTORY
It means that unless a written document can prove a certain historical event, then it cannot be considered
as a historical fact.

LIMITATION OF HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE

The incompleteness of record has limited man’s knowledge of history.

Most human affairs happen without leaving any evidence or records of any kind, no artifacts, or if there
are, no further evidence of the human setting in which to place surviving artifacts.

The past has perished forever with only occasional traces. The whole history of the past called History – as –
actuality

History – as – record - a historian only through the surviving records, and most of
record is only a tiny part the whole phenomenon. Even the archeological and anthropological discoveries are
only small parts discovered from the total past.

Some valid Historical Documents

Government Records
Chronicle’s Accounts
Personal Letter
Receipts, etc.

HISTORIOGRAPHY
Is the history of history
It covers how historians have studied and developed history including its sources, techniques, and
theoretical approaches.
It should not be confused with history because history is the study of the past, the events that happened
in the past.
It focuses on how a certain historical text was written, who wrote it, what was the context of its
publication, what historical method was employed, what sources were used.

POSITIVISM
Is the school of thought that emerged between the 18 th and 19th century. This thought requires empirical
and observable evidence before one can claim that a particular knowledge is true.
Historians were required to show written primary documents in order to write a particular historical
narrative.

POST-COLONIALISM
Is the school of thought that emerge in the early 20th century when formerly colonized nations grappled
with the idea of creating their identities and understanding their societies against the shadows of their
colonial past.

Two things in writing History

1. Tell the history of their nation that will highlight their identity free from that colonial discourse and
knowledge.
2. To criticize the methods, effects and idea of colonialism.

HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN

Facts cannot speak for themselves. It is the historian’s jobs not to seek historical evidences and facts but
also to interpret them. It is their job to give meaning to these facts and organize them into timeline,
establish causes, and write history.

HISTORICAL METHODOLOGY
It comprises certain technique and rules that historians follow in order to properly utilize sources and
historical evidences in writing history.

1. Select the subject to investigate;

2. Collect the probable sources of information on the subject;
3. Examine the sources of genuineness, in part of in whole; and
4. Extract credible “particulars” from the sources (or parts of sources).

II. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES

1. PRIMARY SOURCES

These sources are original and factual, not interpretive.

Are those sources produced at the same time as the event, period or subject being studied.
 E.g. COMMONWEALTH 1935
 Minutes
 Newspaper and magazine articles
 Records
 Photographs
 Eyewitness(es)
 Letters
 Maps,
 Postcard,
 Posters,
 Interviews with participants or witnesses,
 Interviews with people who lived during a certain time,
 Songs,
 Paintings and drawings,
 Sculptures.

2. SECONDARY SOURCES
It is an interpretation of second -hand account of a historical event.
Are those sources produced by an author who used primary sources to produce the material.

E.g. Phil. Revolution 1935

- Teodoro Agoncillo’s Revolt of the masses 1956
 Secondary sources are biographies,
 Histories,
 Literacy criticism,
 Books written by a third party about a historical event,
 Art and theater reviews,
 Newspaper or journal articles that interpret.

3. TERTIARY SOURCES
Presents summaries or condensed versions of materials, usually with refences back to the
primary and/or secondary sources.
They can a good place to look up facts or get a general overview of a subject, but they rarely
contain original material.

E.g. Dictionaries
 Encyclopedias
 Handbooks

III. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL CRITICISMS

 When examining a source, the historian must conduct:

1. EXTERNAL CRITICISM

The practice of verifying the authenticity of evidence by examining the physical characteristics;
consistency with the historical characteristic of the time when it was produced, and the materials
used for the evidence

 Examples of the things that examples of the things that will be examined when conducting, external
criticism of a document include the quality of the paper, the type of ink, and the language and the
words used in the material among others

2. INTERNAL CRITICISM

Looks at content of the source and examine the circumstances of its production
 looks at the truthfulness and factuality of the evidences by looking at the author of the source, its
context, the agenda behind its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended
purpose
entails that the historian acknowledges and analyze how such reports can be manipulated to be
used as a war propaganda.
validating historical sources is important because the use of unverified, falsified, and untruthful
historical sources can lead to equally false conclusions

IV. CONTEXT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY SOURCES

WHAT IS HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION?

Historical interpretation is the process by which we describe, analyze, evaluate, and create an
explanation of past events.
We base our interpretation on primary [firsthand] and secondary [scholarly] historical sources. We
analyze the evidence, contexts, points of view, and frames of reference.
Interpretation might explore causality (what made something happen), processes (revolutions, economic
depressions), conflicts (social class, race, gender), historical outcomes (effects of past events), or many
more topics (creative thinking).
Historical Interpretation requires synthesizing (combining) a variety of evidence, primary and
secondary (critical thinking).
Historical thinking involves the ability to arrive at meaningful and persuasive understandings of the past
by applying all the other historical thinking skills, by drawing appropriately on ideas from different
fields of inquiry or disciplines and by creatively fusing disparate, relevant (and perhaps contradictory)
evidence from primary sources and secondary works.

Another view of historical interpretation

adapted from Richard Drew

Interpretations are in essence thoughtful efforts to represent and explain past events. Interpretations include 3
vital elements:
1. Purposeful, thoughtful efforts--Interpretations are conscious reflections on the past, not simply
irrational spur-of-the-moment opinions. Take time to apply logic and organization to your explanation of
the past-not merely emote or react to the evidence.
2. Representations--Interpretations are efforts to give an audience an image or description of the
event/issue being focused on. We cannot recreate the past perfectly, but we can try to represent faithfully
how events transpired by ground our version in the historical evidence.
3. Past events--Interpretations are the reflections of those of us studying the past, not of the participants in
those events. We refer to the collection representations of the past done by historians as historiography.
The views of participants from the past constitute our primary sources or historical evidence. Without
 the process of reflection removed from the event by time the creator of the view is inevitably partially
influenced by the impact the person/event had on them.

Put these 3 elements together, linking them to the historical evidence surrounding your topic. The result
will be a defensible, intelligible historical interpretation.

A Brief Summary of the First Voyage Around the Worlds by Magellan by Antonio

Pigafetta
Who is Antonio Pigafetta?
A Famous Italian traveler born in Vicenza 1490 and died in the same city in 1534, who is also known by
the name of Antonio Lombardo or Farncisco Antonio Pigafetta. Initially loinked to the other Rhodes,
which was Knight, went to Spain in 1519, accompanied by Monsignor Francisco Chiericato, and was
made available from Carlos V to promote the company initiated by the Catholic Monarch in the
Atlantic. Soon he became a great friendship with Magallanes, who accompanied, together with Juan
Sebastian Elcano, in the famous expedition to the Moluccas begun in August of 1519 and finished in
September 1522.
Pigafetta was born into a wealthy Vicenza family, and studied navigation among other things. He served
on board the galleys of the Knights of Rhodes, and accompanied the papal nuncio, Monsignor
Chieregati, to Spain. Later, he joined the Portuguese captain Ferdinand Magellan and his Spanish crew
on their trip to the Maluku Islands. While in the Philippines Magellan was killed, and Pigafetta was
injured. Nevertheless, he recovered and was among only 18 of Magellan’s original crew who, having
completed the first circumnavigation of the world, returned to Spain on board another vessel, the
Victoria. Most importantly, Magellan kept a journal of his voyage, and this is a key source for
information about Magellan’s famous journey.
Pigafetta’s work instantly became a classic that prominent literary men in the West like WILLIAM
SHAKESPEARE, MICHEL de MONTAIGNE, AND giambattista vico REFERRED TO THE BOOK
IN THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE New World. Pigafetta’s travelogue is one of the most
important primary sources in the study of the precolonial Philippines.
In Pigafetta’s account, their fleet reached what he called the LANDRONES ISLANDS or the “Islands of
the Thieves.”

He recounted:

“These people have no arms, but use sticks, which have a fish bone at the end. They are poor, but
ingenious, and great thieves, and for the sake of that we call these three islands the Landrones Islands.”

The Landrones Islands

The Landrones Islands is presently known as the Marianas Islands. Pigafetta reported that they have
reached Ladrones Islands, Pigafetta reported that they have what he called the Isle of Zamal, now Samar
but Magellan decides to land in another uninhabited island for greater security where they could rest for
a few days.
On March 18, nine men came to them and showed joy and eagerness in seeing them. Magellan realized
that the men were reasonable and welcomed them with food, drinks and gifts.
Pigafetta detailed in amazement and fascination the palm tree which bore fruits called cochos and wine.
He characterized the people as “very familiar and friendly” and willingly showed them different islands
and the names of these islands. The fleet went to Humunu Island (Homonhon) and there they found what
he referred to as the “Watering Place of Good Signs.” For it is in this place that they found the first signs
of gold in the island. They named the island together with a nearby island as the archipelago of St.
Lazarus.
On March 25th, Pigafetta recounted that they saw two balanghai (balangay), a long boat full of people in
Mazzava/Mazaus. The leader whom he referred to the king became closely bonded with Magellan as
they both exchanged gifts to one another.
After a few days, Magellan was introduced to the king’s brother who was also a king of another island
where Pigafetta reported that they saw mines of gold. The gold was abundant that parts of the ship and
the house of the king were made of gold. The king was named Raia Calambu, king of Zuluan and
Calagan (Butuan and Caragua), and the first king was Raia Siagu.
On March 31st (Easter Sunday), Magellan ordered the chaplain to preside a Mass by the shore. The king
heard about this plan and sent two dead pigs and attended the Mass with the other king. Pigafetta then
wrote:

→ “…when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings, went to kiss the cross like us, but they
offered nothing, and at the elevation of the body of our Lord they were kneeling like us, and adored our
Lord with joined hands.”

This was the first mass in the Philippines, and the cross would be famed Magellan’s Cross which is still
preserved at present day. This was the same cross which Magellan explained to the kings as a sign of his
emperor who ordered him to plan it in the places where he would reach and further explained that once
other Spaniards saw this cross, then they would know that they had been in this island and would not
cause them troubles.

By April 7th, Magellan and his men reached the port of Zzubu (Cebu) with the help of Raia Calambu
who offered to pilot them in going to the island. The kind of Cebu demanded that they pay tribute as it
was customary but Magellan refused. By the next day, Magellan’s men and the king of Cebu, together
with other principal men of Cebu, met in an open space. There the king offered a bit of his blood and
demanded that Magellan do the same.

On April 14, Magellan spoke to the kind and encouraged him to be a good Christian by burning all of
the idols and worship the cross instead. The king of Cebu was then baptized as Christian. After 8 days,
all of the island’s inhabitants were already baptized.
→ When the queen came to the mass one day, Magellan gave her an image of the Infant Jesus made by
Pigafetta himself.

→ On 26th of April, Zula, a principal man from the island of Matan (Mactan) went to see Magellan and
asked him for a boat full of men so that he would be able to fight the chief name Silapulapu (Lapu-
Lapu). Magellan offered 3 boats instead and went to Mactan to fight the said chief.

→ They numbered 49 in total and the islanders of Mactan were estimated to number 1,500. Magellan
died in battle. He was pierced with a poison arrow in his right leg. The king of Cebu who was baptized
offered help but Magellan refused so that he could see how they fought.
→The kind also offered the people of Mactan gifts of any value and amount in exchange of Magellan’s
body but the chief refused and wanted to keep Magellan’s body as a memento of their victory.
→Magellan’s men then elected Duarte Barbosa as the new captain.
→ Pigafetta also accounted how Magellan’s slave and interpreter named Henry betrayed them and told
the king of Cebu conspired and betrayed what was left of Magellan’s men. The king invited these men
to a gathering where he said he would present the jewels that he would send for the King of Spain.
→Pigafetta was left on board the ship on board the ship and was not able to join the 24 men who went to
the gathering because he was nursing his battle wounds.
→ The natives had slain all the men expect the interpreter and Juan Serrano who shouted at the men on
this ship to pay ransom so that he would be spared but he was left on the island for they refused to go
back to shore.
→The fleet abandoned Serrano and departed. They left Cebu and continued their journey around the
world.

END OF CHAPTER 1