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 evidence.

● The definition mentions a significant past as the subject matter of history. By

"significant past" it entails that only past events which have 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 fails 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 historians have put a
lot of questions 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 languages, 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 archaeologists in the Philippines hence there are still gaps in
some accounts 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 evidence.

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 from 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 a 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 influenced 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 the 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 a 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 View. 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 from the point of view of the Filipinos.

Pantayong Pananaw .

Only a 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 serves as the channel for the
uniqueness of one's culture. Through the guiding philosophy of Pantayong Pananaw,
Philippine historiography will be seen from the 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
to be read by foreigners to understand our history from our point of view. Examples of these writers are
 the Propagandist in their La Solidaridad. The propagandists 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 foreigners in a foreign language as well but it is meant to be addressed or directed to
Filipinos as an 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 advocate 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 writes about previous
phenomena using historical sources as basis, all claims therefore support only the truth based on
the data available. This however does not preclude the fact that a historian also uses 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 the scientific study of material remains of past human life and activities as stated by
Merriam and Webster. Archaeologists usually excavate 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 of 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.