LESSON 1

THE CONCEPT OF HISTORY

1. Introduction to Readings in Philippine History

The new CHED curriculum on Philippine History descirbed as “Readings on

Phlippine History” tries to change the impression that studying our history is boring
ang pure memorization. The present course means exposing students to where our
history comes from. The source is not simply the textbook. Thus, students will be
reading and analyzing materials from different media—documents, pictures,
videos,audio-visual recordings, digital sources, pictures—that have to do with
Philippine History and culture. Using various techniques, the students are expected
to study and analyze the sources—much like the classic detective work—and come up
with an understanding of a historical truth. They are, therefore, participating in the
writing of history and not just merely studying it.

The focus of the course is to develop historiographical skills connected to context

and content analysis, applying both analytical strategies in themes and topics across
the Philippine past. Primary sources will be the ultimate bridge between the past and
the present, allowing spaces for students to simply not parrot facts about the past
but to gain knowledge that can be used in proposing solutions to the problems of
today.

The end goal is to enable students to understand and appreciate our rich past by
deriving insights from those who were actually present at the time of the event. It also
aims to develop the historical and critical consciousness of the students so that they
will become versatile, articulate, broadminded, morally upright and responsible
citizens.

2. History

To make sense of history, it is necessary to first understand what it is all

about. Many people think that history is merely lists of names, dates, places, and
“important” events. The improper way of teaching of Philippine History has
deprived many students from the primary to the tertiary levels of the story of our
nation and the formation of our identity as Filipinos. Students just breezes
through the subject by learning the bare facts of who, what, where, and when and
losing the how and why. Thus, commemorating our heroes, respecting the symols
of our history and culture, and knowing our past just pass them by with the
significance barely touched. However, history or the study of history is more than
just knowing and memorizing facts.

It is a historian’s duty to draw insights from the ideas and realities that have
shaped the lives of men and women and the society. And in understanding these
ideas, a historian (or in fact, a student of history) can comprehend how situation
happened, identify their elements, and think of how these situations can solve
today’s predicaments and help plan for the future.

The meaning of History

History has been known as the study of the past. Students of general
education often dread the subject for its notoriety in requiring them to memorize
dates, places, names, and events from distant eras. This low appreciation of the
discipline may be rooted from the shallow understanding of history’s relevance to
 their lives and to their respective contexts. While the popular definition of history
as the study of the past is not wrong, it does not give justice to the complexity of
the subject and its importance to human civilization.

HISTORY was derived from the Greek word historia which means
“knowledge acquired through inquiry or investigation”. History as a discipline
existed from around 2, 400 years and is as old as mathematics and philosophy.
This term was then adopted to classical Latin where it acquired a new definition.
Historia became known as the account of the past of a person or group of people
through written documents and historical evidences.

History became an important academic discipline. It became the historian’s

duty to write about the lives of important individuals like monarchs, heroes,
saints, and nobilities. History was also focused on writing about wars, revolutions
and other important breakthroughs. It is thus important to ask: what counts as
history? Traditional historians live with the mantra of “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.

But as any other academic disciplines, history progressed and opened up to

possibility of valid historical sources, which were not limited to written documents,
like government records, chroniclers’ accounts, or personal letters. Giving
premium to written documents essentially invalidates the history of other
civilizations that do not keep written records. Some were keener on passing their
history by word of mouth. Other got their historical documents burned or
destroyed in the events of war or colonization. Restricting historical evidence as
exclusively written is also discrimination against other social classes who were not
recorded in paper. Nobilities, monarchs, the elite, and even the middle class would
have their birth, education, marriage, and death as matters of government and
historical record. But what of peasant families or indigenous groups who were not
given much thought about being registered to government records? Does the
absence of written documents about them mean that they were people of no
history or past? Did they even exist?
This loophole was recognized by historians who started using other kinds of
historical sources, which may not be in written form but were just as valid. A few
of these examples are oral traditions in forms of epics and songs, artifacts,
architecture, and memory. History thus became more inclusive and started
collaborating with other disciplines as its auxiliary disciplines. With the aid of
archeologists, historians can use artifacts from a bygone era to study ancient
civilizations that were formerly ignored in history because of lack of documents.
Linguists can also be helpful in tracing historical evolutions, past connections
among different groups, and flow of cultural influence by studying language and
the changes that it has undergone. Even scientists like biologists can help with
the study of the past through analyzing genetic and DNA patterns of human
societies.

NATURE OF HISTORY (Talekau et.al, 2010)

1. A study of the present in the light of the past: The present has evolved out of
the past. Modern history enables us to understand how society has come to its
present form so that one may intelligently interpret the sequence of events. The
causal relationships between the selected happenings are unearthed that help in
revealing the nature of happenings and framing of general laws.
3. History is the study of man: History deals with man’s struggle through the ages.
History is not static. By selecting “innumerable biographies” and presenting their
lives in the appropriate social context and the ideas in the human context, we
understand the sweep of events. It traces the fascinating story of how man has
developed through the ages, how man has studied to use and control his
environment and how the present institutions have grown out of the past.

3. History is concerned with man in time: It deals with a series of events and each
event occurs at a given point in time. Human history, in fact, is the process of
human development in time. It is time which affords a perspective to events and
lends a charm that brightens up the past.

4. History is concerned with man in space: The interaction of man on environment

and vice versa is a dynamic one. History describes about nations and human
activities in the context of their physical and geographical environment. Out of this
arise the varied trends in the political, social, economic and cultural spheres of
man’s activities and achievements.

5. Objective record of happenings: Every precaution is taken to base the data on

original sources and make them free from subjective interpretation. It helps in
clear understanding of the past and enables us to take well informed decisions.

6. Multisided: All aspects of the life of a social group are closely interrelated and
historical happenings cover all these aspects of life, not limited only to the political
aspect that had so long dominated history.

7. History is a dialogue between the events of the past and progressively emerging
future ends. The historian’s interpretation of the past, his selection of the
significant and the relevant events, evolves with the progressive emergence of new
goals. The general laws regulating historical happenings may not be considered
enough; attempts have to be made to predict future happenings on the basis of the
laws.

8. Not only narration but also analysis: The selected happenings are not merely
narrated; the causal relationships between them are properly unearthed. The
tracing of these relationships lead to the development of general laws that are also
compared and contrasted with similar happenings in other social groups to
improve the reliability and validity of these laws.

9. Continuity and coherence are the necessary requisites of history: History carries
the burden of human progress as it is passed down from generation to generation,
from society to society, justifying the essence of continuity.

10. Relevant: In the study of history only those events are included which are
relevant to the understanding of the present life.

11. Comprehensiveness: According to modern concept, history is not

confined to one period or country or nation. It also deals with all aspects of
human life-political, social, economic, religious, literary, aesthetic and physical,
giving a clear sense of world unity and world citizenship
 Since history is the story of man in relation to totality of his behavior, its scope is
indeed comprehensive and limitless. It encompasses all walks and affairs of
human existence, hence it covers all aspects of topics and areas of study in this
sensible world. The thing is, history will never cease to foster as long as human
civilization continue to exist.

Why study History?

Historians are often asked: what is the use or relevance of studying History?
Why on earth does it matter what happened long ago? The answer is that History
is inescapable. It studies the past and the legacies of the past in the present. Far
from being a 'dead' subject, it connects things through time and encourages its
students to take a long view of such connections.

All people are living histories. To take a few obvious examples: communities
speak languages that are inherited from the past. They live in societies with
complex cultures, traditions and religions that have not been created on the spur
of the moment. People use technologies that they have not themselves invented.
And each individual is born with a personal variant of an inherited genetic
template, known as the genome, which has evolved during the entire life-span of
the human species.

So, understanding the linkages between past and present is absolutely basic
for a good understanding of the condition of being human. That, in a nutshell, is
why History matters. It is not just 'useful', it is essential.

Studying history is essential because it allows us to understand our past,

which in turn allows us to understand our present. An examination of the past
can tell us a great deal about how we can to be who we are. In all cases,
understanding History is integral to a good understanding of the condition of being
human. That allows people to build, and, as may well be necessary, also to
change, upon a secure foundation.

Looking at the past teaches us to see the world through different eyes –
appreciating the diversity of human perceptions, beliefs, and cultures. Different
and/or new perspectives will enable us to analyze critically the present contexts of
society and beings. It also includes a look into the development of Philippine
culture through time especially with the influences of the colonial period that
would eventually shape the present Philippine identity.

QUESTIONS AND ISSUES IN HISTORY

Indeed, history as a discipline has already turned into a complex and

dynamic inquiry. This dynamism inevitably produced various perspectives on the
discipline regarding different questions like: What is history? Why study history?
And history for whom? These questions can be answered by historiography. In
simple terms, historiography is the history of history. History and historiography
should not be confused with each other. The former’s object of study is the past,
the events that happened in the past, and the causes of such events. The latter’s
object of study, on the other hand is history itself (i.e. How was a certain historical
text written? Who wrote it? What was the context of its publication? What
particular historical method was employed? What were the sources use?). Thus,
historiography lets the students have better understanding of history. They do not
only get to learn historical facts, but they are also provided with the
understanding of the facts’ and the historian’s contexts.

History has played various roles in the past. States use history to unite a
nation. It can be used as a tool to legitimize regimes and forge a sense of collective
identity through collective memory. Lessons from the past can be used to make
sense of the present. Learning of past mistakes can help people to not repeat
them. Being reminded of a great past can inspire people to keep their good
practices to move forward.

POSITIVISM

Is the school of thought that emerged between the 18th and 19th century.
This though requires empirical and observable evidence before one can claim that
a particular knowledge is true. Positivism also entails an objective means of
arriving at a conclusion. In the discipline of history, the mantra “no document, no
history” stems from this very same truth, where historians were required to show
written primary documents in order to write a particular historical narrative.
Positivist historians are also expected to be objective and impartial not just in their
arguments but also on their conduct of historical research.
As a narrative, any history that has been taught and written is always
intended for certain group of audience. When the ilustrados, like Jose Rizal,
Isabelo de los Reyes, and Pedro Paterno wrote history, they intended it for the
Spaniards so that they would realize that Filipinos are people of their own intellect
and culture. When American historians depicted the Filipino people as uncivilized
in their publications, they intended that narrative for their fellow Americans to
justify their colonization of the islands. They wanted the colonization to appear not
as a means of undermining the Philippines’ sovereignty, but as a civilizing mission
to fulfill what they called as the “white man’s burden.” The same is true for
nations which prescribe official versions of their history like North Korea, the Nazi
Germany during the war period, and Thailand. The same was attempted by
Marcos in the Philippines during the 1970’s.

POSTCOLONIALSIM

Is a school of thought that emerged 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.
Postcolonial history looks at two things in writing history: first is to tell the history
of their nation that will highlight their identity free from that of colonial discourse
and knowledge, and second is to criticize the methods, effects, and idea of
colonialism. Postcolonial history is therefore a reaction and an alternative to the
colonial history that colonial powers created and taught to their subjects.

One of the problems confronted by history is the accusation that the history
is always written by victors. This connotes that the narrative of the past is always
written from the bias of the powerful and the more dominant player. For instance,
the history of the Second World War in the Philippines always depicts the United
States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army as the oppressors. Filipinos
who collaborated with the Japanese were lumped in the category of traitors or
collaborators. However, a more thorough historical investigation will reveal a more
nuanced account of the history of that period instead of a simplified narrative as a
story of hero versus villain.
 HISTORY AND THE HISTORIAN

It is the historian’s job not just to seek historical evidences and facts but
also to interpret these facts: “facts cannot speak for themselves.” it is the job of the
historian to give meaning to these facts and organize them into a timeline,
establish causes, and write history. Meanwhile, the historian is not a blank paper
who mechanically interprets and analyzes present historical fact. He is a person of
his own who is influenced by his own context, environment, ideology, education,
and influences, among others. In that sense, his interpretation of the historical
fact is affected by his context and circumstances.

Historical research requires rigor. Despite the fact that historians cannot
ascertain absolutely objectivity, the study of history remains scientific because of
the rigor of research and methodology that historians employ. Historical
methodology comprises certain techniques and rules that historians follow in
order to properly utilize sources and historical evidences in writing history.
Certain rules apply in cases of conflicting accounts in different sources, and how
to properly treat eyewitness accounts and oral sources as valid historical evidence.
In doing so, historical claims done by historians and the arguments that they
forward in their historical writings, while may be influenced by the historian’s
inclinations, can still be validated by using reliable evidences and employing
correct and meticulous historical methodology.

POST LEARNING ACTIVITY

1. Form a group which consists three (3) members each. Try to discuss and
brainstorm about your important duties as students of history. What will be
your responsibilities not just as a student but as a citizen as you study
history/Philippine History?

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

3. Do you think that learning about our History is important and relevant to your
course? Explain your answer.
 LESSON II
HISTORICAL SOURCES

Sources are our way of peering into the past, it is from historical sources
that our history is studied and written. But in analyzing them, several
methodologies and theories were used by historians to properly study history and
glean from the sources what is, for them, a proper way of writing history to
enhance and disseminate national identity.

Sources of information provide the needed evidence from which historians and
historiographers obtain facts and details about the peoples’ life and experiences in
the past. Historians must not only rely on information that are already presented,
but rather, it is imperative for them to re-enact and revisit historical details in
terms of triangulating information through the use of in-depth interview to
eyewitnesses, analysing documents, and other important records left by those who
first studied history. This is fundamentally important to come up with the real and
genuine presentation of one’s historical narrative.

1. TWO TYPES OF SOURCES

A. Primary Sources

Primary sources are first-hand materials produced by people or groups

directly involved in the event or topic being studied. These people are either
participants or eyewitnesses to the event. These sources range from eyewitness’s
accounts, diaries, letters, legal documents, official documents (government or
private), and even photographs.

Formally, there ae eight examples of these primary sources

1. Photographs that may reflect social conditions of historical realities and
everyday life.
2. Old sketches and drawings that may indicate the conditions of life of
societies in the past.
3. Old maps that may reveal how space and geography were used to
emphasize trade routes, structural build up, etc.

4. Cartoons for political expression or propaganda

5. Material evidence of the prehistoric past like cave drawings, old
syllabaries, and ancient writings
6. Statistical tables, graphs, and charts
7. Oral history or recordings by electronic means of accounts of
eyewitnesses or participant; the recordings are then transcribed and
used for research.
8. Published and unpublished primary documents, eyewitnesses accounts,
and other written sources.
Locating Primary Sources

 National Archives of the Philippines

The National Archives of the Philippines is the home of about 60 million
documents from the centuries of Spanish rule in the Philippines, the
American and Japanese occupations, as well as the year of the
Republic. It is also the final repository for the voluminous notarized
documents of the country

 National Library of the Philippines (Pambansang Aklatan ng Pilipinasor

Aklatang Pambansa ng Pilipinas, abbreviated NLP) is the official national
library of the Philippines. The complex is located in Ermita, a portion of
Rizal Park facing T.M. Kalaw Avenue, neighboring culturally significant
buildings such as the Museum of Philippine Political History and the
National Historical Commission. Like its neighbors, it is under the
jurisdiction of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA)

 National Historical Commission of the Philippines (Pambansang

Komisyong Pangkasaysayan ng Pilipinas, abbreviated NHCP) is a
government agency of the Philippines. Its mission is "the promotion of
Philippine history and cultural heritage through research,
dissemination, conservation, sites management and heraldry work.

 National Museum of the Philippines (Pambansang Museo ng Pilipinas)-

Repository and guardian of the Philippines' natural and cultural
heritage. As one of the lead government cultural agencies, it is tasked to
achieve the goals of instilling cultural consciousness and a sense of
pride and nationalism among Filipino citizens through its activities
covering the sciences, education and culture. 

 U.P. Main Library

 DLSU Library
 ADMU Rizal Library (the Rizal Library)
is the main university library of the Ateneo de Manila University. It is
named after Ateneo de Manila alumnus José Rizal, the national hero of
the Philippines.
The current collection exceeds the requirements of the Commission on
Higher Education (CHED) and the Philippine Accrediting Association of
Schools, Colleges and Universities (PAASCU), of which the Ateneo de
Manila University is a member, for academic libraries in the
Philippines. The library also keeps rare Filipiniana materials, which
include a permanent exhibit of Rizal memorabilia; the Trinidad Pardo
de Tavera collection; the American Historical Collection; the Ateneo
Library of Women's Writings (ALIWW); and other special collections and
manuscripts by Filipino scholars, writers, and artists. Around the
library are glass cases filled with prehistoric Philippine earthenware as
well as porcelain from China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Thailand. With
the country’s National Library, the library has some of the largest
holdings of materials in the Philippines.

 UST Library is known as the Miguel de Benavides Library, after its

founder Fray Miguel de Benavides, the University Library can be
 considered as the oldest in the country. The first seeds were planted
when in the early 17th century "the founder," Fr. Miguel de Benavides
and other benefactors such as Fr. Diego Soria and Hernando de Los
Rios Coronel, donated their private collections for a future college.
Through the history of the University other Dominicans contributed
books indispensable in the education for the priesthood and other
sciences.
 Ayala Museum- Forming the core of the museum's historical
collections are sixty handcrafted dioramas that chronicle the rich
tapestry of Philippine history. Ayala Museum also features a one-of-a-
kind boat gallery showcasing miniatures of some of the watercrafts
that contributed to the development of Philippine maritime trade and
colonial economy. Archaeological and ethnographic objects from the
country's northern and southern cultural communities complement
the historical collection. The fine arts collection features important
works by three painters considered pioneers in Philippine art—Juan
Luna (1857-1899), Fernando Amorsolo (1882-1972), and Fernando
Zobel (1924-1984). Genre paintings from the 19th century Philippines
are represented. 

B. Secondary Sources

Secondary sources were created by someone who did not experience

first-hand or participate in the events or conditions you're researching.
Gottschalk simply defines secondary sources as “the testimony of anyone
who is not an eyewitness—that is one who was not present at the event of
which he tells” (p.53). Scholars writing about historical events, people,
objects, or ideas produce secondary sources because they help explain new
or different positions and ideas about primary sources. 

Secondary sources are not evidence but rather commentary on and

discussion of evidence. Secondary sources are generally scholarly books
and articles and scholarly journals. A secondary source interprets and
analyzes primary sources.

To determine if a source is primary or secondary, ask yourself:

 Was the source created by someone directly involved in the events you're
studying (primary), or by another researcher (secondary)?
 Does the source provide original information (primary), or does it summarize
information from other sources (secondary)?
 Are you directly analyzing the source itself (primary), or only using it for
background information (secondary)?

Both primary and secondary sources are useful in writing and learning history.
However, historians and students of history need to thoroughly scrutinize these
historical sources to avoid deception and to come up with the historical truth. The
historian should be able to conduct an external and internal criticism of the
source, especially primary sources which can age in centuries.

PHILIPPINE HISTORIOGRAPHY
 Underwent several changes since the precolonial period until the present.
Ancient Filipinos narrated their history through communal songs and epics that
they passed orally from a generation to another. When the Spaniards came, their
chroniclers started recording their observations through written accounts. The
perspective of historical writing and inquiry also shifted. The Spanish colonizers
narrated the history of their colony in a bipartite view. They saw the age before
colonization as a dark period in the history of the islands, until they brought light
through Western thought and Christianity. Early nationalists refuted this
perspective and argued the tripartite view. They saw the precolonial society as a
luminous age that ended with darkness when the colonizers captured their
freedom. They believed that the light would come again once the colonizers were
evicted from the Philippines. Filipino historian Zues Salazar introduced the new
guiding philosophy for writing and teaching history: pantayong pananaw (from us-
from us perspective). This perspective highlights the importance of facilitating an
internal conversation and discourse among Filipinos about our own history, using
the language that is understood by everyone.

2. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL CRITICISM

A. External Criticism is the practice of verifying the authenticity of evidence by
examining its 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 will be examined when conducting external criticism
of a document include the quality of the paper, the type of the ink, and the
language and words used in the material, among others.
 Tests of Authenticity (“Is it genuine?”)
i. Determine the date of the document to see whether they are
anachronistic (a chronological misplacing of persons, events, or customs
in regard to each other) e.g. pencils did not exist before the 16th Century
ii. Determine the author e.g. handwriting, signature, seal
iii. Anachronistic style e.g. idiom, orthography, punctuation Louis
Gottschalk, Understanding History
iv. Anachronistic reference to events e.g. too early, too late, too remote
v. Provenance or custody e.g. determines its genuineness
vi. Semantics – determining the meaning of a text or word
vii. Hermeneutics –(principles of interpretation of ambiguous words)

C. Internal Criticism is the examination of the truthfulness of the evidence. It looks at

the content of the source and examines the circumstance of its production. Internal
criticism looks at the truthfulness and factuality of the evidence by looking at the
author of the source, its context, the agenda behind its creation, the knowledge
which informed it, and its intended purpose, among others. For example, Japanese
reports and declarations during the period of the war should not be taken as a
historical fact hastily.

 Tests of Credibility
i. Identification of the author e.g. to determine his reliability; mental
processes, personal attitudes
 ii. Determination of the approximate date e.g. handwriting, signature, seal
iii. Ability to tell the truth e.g. nearness to the event, competence of witness,
degree of attention

The task of the historian is to look at the available historical sources and select
the most relevant and meaningful for history and for the subject matter that he is
studying. History, like other academic discipline, has come a long way but still has
a lot of remaining tasks to do. It does not claim to render absolute and exact
judgment because as long as questions are continuously asked, and as long as
time unfolds, the study of history can never be complete. The task of the historian
is to organize the past that is being created so that it can offer lessons for nations,
societies, and civilization. It is the historian’s job to seek for the meaning of
recovering the past to let the people see the continuing relevance of provenance,
memory, remembering, and historical understanding for both the present and the
future.

Technique in Analyzing Sources of History

Understanding OPVL (Origin, Purpose, Values, and Limitations
(Source: Keystone Academy Libraries https://www.bing.com/search?
q=OPVL&cvid=c3ce78d0d41644f9b97b3dd377ff8077&aqs=edge..69i57.2308j0j9&FORM=ANAB01&PC=HCTS)

Origin, Purpose, Value and Limitation (OPVL) is a technique for

analysing historical documents. It is used extensively in the International
Baccalaureate curriculum and testing materials, and is incredibly helpful in
becoming critical observers. It is also known as Document Based Questions
(DBQ).

1. Origin
In order to analyse a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not
all of these questions can be answered. The more you do know about where a
document is coming from, the easier it is to ascertain purpose, value and
limitation.

Other questions must be answered beyond whether the source is primary or

secondary and will give you much more information about the document that will
help you answer questions in the other categories. In the context of looking into
the origin of a certain document, the following questions are to be answered:
a. Who created it?
b. Who is the author?
c. When was it created?
d. When was it published?
e. Where was it published?
f. Who is publishing it?
g. Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to
our evaluation?

2. Purpose
This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to
figure out the purpose for its creation. You must be able to think as the author of
the document. At this point you are still only focusing on the single piece of work
you are evaluating
Questions to consider are as follows:
a. Why does this document exist?
b. Why did the author create this piece of work? What is the intent?
c. Why did the author choose this particular format?
d. Who is the intended audience? Who was the author thinking would
receive this?
e. What does the document “say”?
f. Can it tell you more than is on the surface?

Avoid “I think the document means this...” Obviously, if you are

making a statement it is coming from your thinking. Practice saying
“The document means this...because it is supported by x evidence.”

3. Value
Now here comes the difficult part. Putting on your historian hat, you must
determine: Based on who wrote it, when/where it came from and why it was
created...what value does this document have as a piece of evidence? This is where
you show your expertise and put the piece in context.

Questions to answer in this part include:

a. What can we tell about the author from the piece?
b. What can we tell about the time period from the piece?
c. Under what circumstances was the piece created and how does the piece
reflect those circumstances?
d. What can we tell about any controversies from the piece?
e. Does the author represent a particular ‘side’ of a controversy or event?
f. What can we tell about the author’s perspectives from the piece?
g. What was going on in history at the time the piece was created and how
does this piece accurately reflect it?

It helps if you know the context of the document and can explain what the
document helps you to understand about the context.

4. Limitation
The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather to
say: at what point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians or
students of history?

With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole

is a given because the source was created by one person (or a small group of
people?), naturally they will not have given every detail of the context. Do not say
that the author left out information unless you have concrete proof (from another
source) that they chose to leave information out.

Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events
that came after the creation of the document. Do not state that the document
“does not explain X” (if X happened later).
 Being biased does not limit the value of a source. If you are going to
comment on the bias of a document, you must go into detail. Who is it biased
towards? Who is it biased against? What part of a story does it leave out? What
part of the story is MISSING because of parts left out?
a. What part of the story can we NOT tell from this document?
b. How could we verify the content of the piece?
c. Does this piece inaccurately reflect anything about the time period?
d. What does the author leave out and why does he/she leave it out (if you
know)?
e. What is purposely not addressed?

This is again an area for you to show your expertise of the context. You need
to briefly explain the parts of the story that the document leaves out. Give
examples of other documents that might mirror or answer this document. What
parts of the story/context can this document not tell?

POST LEARNING ACTIVITY

4. What is the main distinction between primary source and secondary source?
5. Read the excerpts below then do a comparative analysis.
The following readings discuss the findings on the remains of what was then
considered the earliest known human remains in the Philippines—Tabon Man.

 Robert B. Fox. The Tabon Caves: Archaeological Explorations and Excavations on

Palawan Island, Philippines (Manila, 1970) p. 40

Tabon Man-During the initial excavations of Tabon Cave June and July,
1962, the scattered fossil bones of at least thre~ individuals were
excavated, including a large fragment of a frontal bone with the brows
and portions of the nasal bones. These fossil bones were recovered towards
the rear of the cave alona b the left wall. Unfortunately, the area in which the
fossil human bones were recovered had been disturbed by Magapode birds.
It was not possible in 1962 to ·establish the association of these bones
with a specific flake assemblage, although they were provisionally related to
either Flake Assemblage II or III. Subsequent excavations in the same area
now strongly suggest that the fossil human bones were associated with Flake
Assemblage III, for only the flakes of this assemblage have been found to
date in this area of the cave.3 The available data would suggest that Tabon
Man may be dated from 22,000 to 24,000 years ago. But, only further
excavations in the cave and chemical analysis of human and animal bones
from disturbed and undisturbed levels in the cave will define the exact age
of the human fossils.
The fossil bones are those of Homo sapiens (Fig. 12). These will form a
separate study by a specialist which will be included in the final site report
for Tabon Cave. It is important to point out, however, because of a recent
publication (Scctt 1969), that a preliminary study of the fossil bones of Tabon
Man shows that it is above average in skull dimensions when compared to
the modern Filipino. There is no evidence that Tabon Man was " ... a less
brainy individual. .. " [Scott (1969) 36]. Moreover, Scott's study includes many
 mistatements about the Tabon Caves, always the problem when writers work
from "conversations."
 William Henry Scott. Prehispanic Source Materials for the Studyof Philippine History
(Revised Edition) (Quezon City, 1984), pp. 14—15.

Tabon Man – The earliest human skull remains known in the Philippines are
the fossilized fragments of a skull and jawbone of three individuals who are
collectively called “Tabon Man” after the place where they were found on the
west coast of Palawan. “Tabon Man” after the place where they were found
on the west coast Palawan. Tabon Cave appears to be a kind of little
Stone Age factory: both finished tools and waste cores and flakes
have been found at four different levels in the main chamber. Charcoal left
from cooking fires has been recovered from three of these assemblages and
dated by C-14 to roughly 7,000 B.C., 20,000 B.C., and 28,000 B.C. with an
earlier level lying so far below these that i must represent Upper Pleistocene
dates like 45 or 50 thousand years ago....Physical anthropologists who have
examined the Tabon skullcap are agreed that it belonged to modern man---
that is, Homo sapiens as distinguished from those mid-Pleistocene species
nowadays called Homo erectus. Two experts have given the further opinion
that the mandible is “Australian” in physical type, and that the skullcap
measurements are mostly nearly like those of Ainus and Tasmanians. What
this basically means is that Tabon Man was “pre-Mongoloid,” Mongoloid being
the term anthropologists apply to the racial stock which entered Southeast
Asia during the Holocene and absorbed earlier peoples to produce the modern
Malay;Indonesian,Filipino, and Pacific peoples popularly—and unscientifically
—called, “the brown race.” Tabon Man presumably belonged to one of those
earlier peoples, but, if decently clothed in flesh, T-shirt, and blue jeans, might
pass unnoticed in Quiapo today, whatever his facial features are concerned,
nothing can be said about the color of his skin or hair, or the shape of his
nose or eyes—except one thing: Tabon Man was not a Negrito.

a. Which is the primary source and the secondary source between the two
readings?
b. Do a credibility analysis of the sources. Who between the two authors is
more credible to talk about the topic?