Readings in Philippine History
History
- to make sense of history, it is necessary to first understand what it is all about.
- many people think that history is merely list of names, dates, places, and “important” events.
- is more than just knowing and memorizing facts.
- the study of history, therefore, is the study of the beliefs and desires, practices, and institutions of human
beings.
- with this definition, history becomes an active factor in the study of Philippine society.
- a look into the development of Philippine culture, the influences of the colonial period that would
eventually shape the present Philippine identity.
Why Study History?
- an examination of the past can tell us great deal about how we came to be who we are.
- this means looking at the roots of modern institutions, ideas, values, and problems.
- looking at the past teaches us to see the world through different eyes.
- appreciating the diversity of human perceptions, beliefs, and cultures.
History as an academic discipline
- we discuss history as a subject of study, we are referring to the body of knowledge that deals with the
interpretation of the past, in a meaningful way.
- these are the people who investigate past results, examine them, and then elaborate on them, it can be
past by anybody, including academics, researchers, laypeople interested in history, and the general public.
Historical Methodology
- The historical method is used by historians to gather evidence of historical events, assess the evidence, and
interpret what the data indicates about historical events.,
- a lot of the historical method's components take a scientific approach and necessitate analysis, critical
thought, and judgment.
-however, understanding the history is ultimately influenced by the prejudice of the person drawing the
findings. Because of this, historical events may be interpreted differently even when they are supported by the same
pieces of evidence.
History and Historiography
Both historiography and history are concerned with the past.
Historiography is the study of history writing, while history is the study of the past as it relates to humanity.
Historiography is the writing of the past based on critical analysis and the evaluation of sources, whereas
history is the study of the past and might involve writing about it.
Historiography refers to any historical writing about a certain topic. Books and records are also used as
sources in history and historiography.
Writing about history is the subject of historiography. It is the “study of the history of history” in its
broadest meaning (as it is described by historians).
The meaning of “History”
excerpts from Understanding History: A Primer of Historical Method by Louis Gottschalk (1950,New York: Knopf, p.17)
the English word history is derived from the Greek noun ιστορία meaning learning. As used by the Greek
philosopher Aristotle, history meant a systematic account of a set of natural phenomena, whether or not
chronological factoring was a factor in the account
in the course of time, however, the equivalent Latin word scientia (English, science) came to be used more
regularly to designate non-chronological systematic accounts of natural phenomena; and the word history
was reserved usually for accounts of phenomena (especially human affairs) in chronological order
, The term ‘History’ has been taken from the German word ‘Geschichte’ means an intelligible and significant
narration of the past events.
Infact development of history started with the ancient Greek historians such as Herodotus and Thucydides
Herodotus (484?-425? B.C.)
has been called the ‘Father of History’, a compliment initially given to him Cicero.
He is given credit for recording information from all over but criticized for using less than reliable sources and
sometimes espousing what seems like propaganda.
Most of Herodotus's histories were stories he picked up from travelers, merchants and priests. He seems to
have known many were exaggerations or unproven claims and he made some effort to pick out what was
plausible. Occasionally he ascribed events to myths. Aristotle called him a “legend monger."
[Source: Daniel Mendelsohn, The New Yorker, April 28, 2008]
Herodotus, on the other hand, is seen as the ‘sensational historian’, relying on a blend of oral accounts,
gossip, myths, rumors, and synthesizing it with his own view of the events, allowing the reader to make of it
what they will.
He is seen as the antithesis of what it is to be a historian as he made no attempt to find ‘truth’ on a factual
basis and was content to provide multiple accounts of events and leave the reader to ascertain for
themselves which one they identified with the most.
Thucydides
regarded as a much better historian than Herodotus, who tended to romanticize and exaggerate.
Thucydides named his sources and included documents to back up his claims.
His style was terse and skeptical. And his emphasis on getting his facts straight makes him such a rich source
of moral guidance and historical wisdom.
It was Thucydides after all who first summed up the pattern of history when he said disasters “have occurred
and always will occur as long as he nature of mankind remains the same. “
[Source: Daniel Mendelsohn, The New Yorker, January 12, 2004]
Thucydides is regarded as the ‘scientific historian’, relying on facts, dates, events and personalities to present
the ‘factual’ narrative of history.
He detested any reliance on the supernatural, abhorred subjectivity and strived to be as objective as possible
and was concerned about writing on solely the events of his own time, the only area of history where he
could personally verify through examination of written records and eyewitness accounts.
He is seen as the ‘Father of the Historical Method’.
Comments about History
Napoleon Bonaparte
- “History is written by the winners”
George Santayana
- “Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.”
George Orwell
- “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history”
Confucius
- “Study the past if you would define the future”
Martin Luther King Jr.
- “We are not makers of history. We are made by history”
Robert Penn Warren
History
- to make sense of history, it is necessary to first understand what it is all about.
- many people think that history is merely list of names, dates, places, and “important” events.
- is more than just knowing and memorizing facts.
- the study of history, therefore, is the study of the beliefs and desires, practices, and institutions of human
beings.
- with this definition, history becomes an active factor in the study of Philippine society.
- a look into the development of Philippine culture, the influences of the colonial period that would
eventually shape the present Philippine identity.
Why Study History?
- an examination of the past can tell us great deal about how we came to be who we are.
- this means looking at the roots of modern institutions, ideas, values, and problems.
- looking at the past teaches us to see the world through different eyes.
- appreciating the diversity of human perceptions, beliefs, and cultures.
History as an academic discipline
- we discuss history as a subject of study, we are referring to the body of knowledge that deals with the
interpretation of the past, in a meaningful way.
- these are the people who investigate past results, examine them, and then elaborate on them, it can be
past by anybody, including academics, researchers, laypeople interested in history, and the general public.
Historical Methodology
- The historical method is used by historians to gather evidence of historical events, assess the evidence, and
interpret what the data indicates about historical events.,
- a lot of the historical method's components take a scientific approach and necessitate analysis, critical
thought, and judgment.
-however, understanding the history is ultimately influenced by the prejudice of the person drawing the
findings. Because of this, historical events may be interpreted differently even when they are supported by the same
pieces of evidence.
History and Historiography
Both historiography and history are concerned with the past.
Historiography is the study of history writing, while history is the study of the past as it relates to humanity.
Historiography is the writing of the past based on critical analysis and the evaluation of sources, whereas
history is the study of the past and might involve writing about it.
Historiography refers to any historical writing about a certain topic. Books and records are also used as
sources in history and historiography.
Writing about history is the subject of historiography. It is the “study of the history of history” in its
broadest meaning (as it is described by historians).
The meaning of “History”
excerpts from Understanding History: A Primer of Historical Method by Louis Gottschalk (1950,New York: Knopf, p.17)
the English word history is derived from the Greek noun ιστορία meaning learning. As used by the Greek
philosopher Aristotle, history meant a systematic account of a set of natural phenomena, whether or not
chronological factoring was a factor in the account
in the course of time, however, the equivalent Latin word scientia (English, science) came to be used more
regularly to designate non-chronological systematic accounts of natural phenomena; and the word history
was reserved usually for accounts of phenomena (especially human affairs) in chronological order
, The term ‘History’ has been taken from the German word ‘Geschichte’ means an intelligible and significant
narration of the past events.
Infact development of history started with the ancient Greek historians such as Herodotus and Thucydides
Herodotus (484?-425? B.C.)
has been called the ‘Father of History’, a compliment initially given to him Cicero.
He is given credit for recording information from all over but criticized for using less than reliable sources and
sometimes espousing what seems like propaganda.
Most of Herodotus's histories were stories he picked up from travelers, merchants and priests. He seems to
have known many were exaggerations or unproven claims and he made some effort to pick out what was
plausible. Occasionally he ascribed events to myths. Aristotle called him a “legend monger."
[Source: Daniel Mendelsohn, The New Yorker, April 28, 2008]
Herodotus, on the other hand, is seen as the ‘sensational historian’, relying on a blend of oral accounts,
gossip, myths, rumors, and synthesizing it with his own view of the events, allowing the reader to make of it
what they will.
He is seen as the antithesis of what it is to be a historian as he made no attempt to find ‘truth’ on a factual
basis and was content to provide multiple accounts of events and leave the reader to ascertain for
themselves which one they identified with the most.
Thucydides
regarded as a much better historian than Herodotus, who tended to romanticize and exaggerate.
Thucydides named his sources and included documents to back up his claims.
His style was terse and skeptical. And his emphasis on getting his facts straight makes him such a rich source
of moral guidance and historical wisdom.
It was Thucydides after all who first summed up the pattern of history when he said disasters “have occurred
and always will occur as long as he nature of mankind remains the same. “
[Source: Daniel Mendelsohn, The New Yorker, January 12, 2004]
Thucydides is regarded as the ‘scientific historian’, relying on facts, dates, events and personalities to present
the ‘factual’ narrative of history.
He detested any reliance on the supernatural, abhorred subjectivity and strived to be as objective as possible
and was concerned about writing on solely the events of his own time, the only area of history where he
could personally verify through examination of written records and eyewitness accounts.
He is seen as the ‘Father of the Historical Method’.
Comments about History
Napoleon Bonaparte
- “History is written by the winners”
George Santayana
- “Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.”
George Orwell
- “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history”
Confucius
- “Study the past if you would define the future”
Martin Luther King Jr.
- “We are not makers of history. We are made by history”
Robert Penn Warren
