HISTORY
According to Edward Hallet Carr (1892-1982) ,
“It is the result of the interaction between the historian and
his facts, a perpetual dialogue between the present and
the past.”
“The historian starts with the provisional selection of facts
and a provisional interpretation in the light of which that
selection has been made - by others as well as by himself.
As he works, both the interpretation and the selection and
ordering of facts undergo subtle and perhaps partly
unconscious changes through the reciprocal action of one
or the other.”
Vocabulary:
provisional = temporary
subtle = slight
reciprocal = dependent; mutual
“And this reciprocal action also
involves reciprocity between
present and past, since the
historian is part of the present
and the facts belong to the
past.”
Vocabulary:
reciprocity = mutual dependence
“ The historian and the facts of history
are necessary to one another.
The historian without his facts is rootless and futile;
the facts without their historian
are dead and meaningless.”
Is it possible
that the same event in history
be interpreted in different ways
by two different historians?
If yes, then we can say that
history is highly interpretive.
Vocabulary:
Interpretive = interpretative; that provides interpretation
And this being the case, as we read history,
it is necessary that we examine the following:
•
•
•
the different interpretations of the author
the dates
and the circumstances surrounding the historical
writings
The writing of history is called HISTORIOGRAPHY.
Particularly, historiography is the writing of history
based on scholarly disciplines such as the analysis
and evaluation of source materials.
Source: encarta.msn.com
1898 political cartoon showing
U.S. PresidentMcKinley with a
child "savage".
Here, returning the Philippines
to Spain is compared to
throwing the child off a cliff.
How is history written?
1. As history is a study of the past, it is the historians’
first task to look for things that survived from the
past, wherever they can be found.
2. Then, they must go on to make sure that these
remnants or relics are genuine artifacts, and not fake.
3. Finally, the historians must give meaning to these
remnants of the past by interpreting them.
They must try to show how these remnants are
related to one another.
By doing so, a mental picture is made of the past.
Source: Jose S. Arcilla, S.J., An Introduction to Philippine History (Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1998)

Nnnn
1.
Defining the problem
2.
Locating relevant sources
3.
Summarizing information from
historical sources
1.
Evaluation of historical sources
“Historical facts/data are obtained from both
primary and secondary sources:
1. Primary sources, which are either written or
oral, are eyewitness or contemporaneous
accounts by those were participants or
observers living during a particular historical
era.
2. Secondary sources, on the other hand, such as
history textbooks or popular magazine
articles, are materials based on primary
sources.”
3.
Source: Digna Balangue Apilado, “A Methodology of Local History,” Oral and Local History (UP
Diliman/PNHS)

“Primary sources carry greater weight than
secondary sources when judging the veracity
and accuracy of facts. The more primary
sources are used in a research, the greater the
means of cross-validating the data.” (Apilado)
Vocabulary:
veracity = truthfulness
Sources may come in the
form of documents,
numerical records, oral
statements or relics.

What are external and internal criticism?
1. External Criticism – refers to the genuineness of any and
all documents the researcher uses, looks into the nature
and authenticity of the document
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Who wrote the document?
For what purpose was the document written? For
whom was it intended and why?
When was the document written? Is the date on the
document accurate? Could the details described have
actually happened during this time?
Where was the document written? Could the details
described have occurred in this location?
Under what condition was the document written?
Do different forms or versions of the document exist?
2. Internal Criticism – determining the accuracy of the
content of the document and the truthfulness of the
author, looks into what the document says
a. Was the author present during the event he/she was
describing?
b. Was the author a participant or observer?
c. Was the author competent to describe the event?
d. Was the author emotionally involved in the event?
e. Did the author have any vested interest in the
outcome of the event?
1.
Must be original work, not a rehash or recycling of
historical facts which has been written about
countless times.
2.
It deals with subject matter which is of historical
value. It must show where we come from, how
things changed, what particular path was taken,
and for what reason and, why we are and where
we are now.
3.
It must meet basic academic standards of any
written work
1.
Do not plagiarize. Always acknowledge and provide citation for
the source of your data.
Do not pass work of another as your own, because this will
eventually find out. Plagiarism is intellectual theft.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Do not make others do your research work or use other peoples’
data without giving credit to them.
Respect the wishes of your sources by keeping confidential any
information given to you off the record.
Always tell your informants or sources that you are going to use
the materials they gave or lent or the testimonies they have
provided ; also, that you will be using these in a written account.
Do not conduct your research under false pretenses.
1.
Introduction- short essay on what your topic is about, its
scope, and time frame and possibly what made you choose
the topic for your research.
2.
Chronology- this optional but useful for complex narratives
and would help you reconcile conflicting dates of he events
that occurred.
3.
Text- the main part of your written account which contains
the bulk of your data; this must be organized and coherent.
4.
Analysis – an explanation of the data you have provided:
this could include the analytical framework or theory that
you employed.
5.
Conclusions and recommendations - -based on the text and
analysis, a summation of your findings
1.
Must be original work, not a rehash or recycling of
historical facts which has been written about
countless times.
2.
It deals with subject matter which is of historical
value. It must show where we come from, how
things changed, what particular path was taken,
and for what reason and, why we are and where
we are now.
3.
It must meet basic academic standards of any
written work
6. Appendix and Glossary – these are materials which
could not be incorporated into the text but would
add to the clarity and depth of your research.
7. Endnotes and footnotes –usually demanded in
academic research but may not always be
applicable
8. Bibliography- a listing of books and sources used,
classified according to whether primary or
secondary ,published or unpublished, oral or
witten.












External criticism: authenticity and provenance
Garraghan divides criticism into six inquiries[3]
When was the source, written or unwritten, produced (date)?
Where was it produced (localization)?
By whom was it produced (authorship)?
From what pre-existing material was it produced (analysis)?
In what original form was it produced (integrity)?
What is the evidential value of its contents (credibility)?
The first four are known as higher criticism; the fifth, lower criticism; and, together,
external criticism. The sixth and final inquiry about a source is called internal criticism.
R. J. Shafer on external criticism: "It sometimes is said that its function is negative,
merely saving us from using false evidence; whereas internal criticism has the positive
function of telling us how to use authenticated evidence."[4]
[edit]Internal criticism: historical reliability
Noting that few documents are accepted as completely reliable, Louis Gottschalk sets
down the general rule, "for each particular of a document the process of establishing
credibility should be separately undertaken regardless of the general credibility of the
author." An author's trustworthiness in the main may establish a background probability
for the consideration of each statement, but each piece of evidence extracted must be
weighed individually