Week #7 Chapter 3 Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and Controversies . Learning Objectives: To interpret historical events using primary sources. To recognize the multiplicity of interpretation than can be read from a historical text. To identify the advantages and disadvantages of employing critical tools in interpreting historical events through primary sources. To demonstrate ability to argue for or against a particular issue using primary sources. Making Sense of the Past: Historical Interpretation History is the study of the past, but a more contemporary definition is centered on how it impacts the present through its consequences. Goeffrey Barraclough defines history as “the attempt to discover, on the basis of fragmentary evidence, the significant things about the past.” He also notes “the history we read, though based on facts, is strictly speaking, not factual at all, but a series of accepted judgments.” Such judgments of historians on how the past should be seen make the foundation of historical interpretation. The Code of Kalantiaw is a mythical legal code in the epic history Maragtas. Before it was revealed as a hoax, it was a source of pride for the people of Aklan. In fact, a historical marker was installed in the town of Batan, Aklan in 1956, with the following text: “CODE OF KALANTIAW. Datu Bendehara Kalantiaw, third Chief of Panay, born in Aklan, established his government in the peninsula of Batang, Aklan Sakup. Considered the First Filipino Lawgiver, he promulgated in about 1433 a penal code now known as Code of Kalantiaw containing 18 articles. Don Marcelino Orilla of Zaragoza, Spain, obtained the original manuscript from an old chief of Panay which was later translated into Spanish by Rafael Murviedo Yzamaney.” It was only 1968 that it was proved a hoax, when William Henry Scott, then a doctoral candidate at the University of Santo Tomas, defended his research on pre – Hispanic sources in Philippine History. He attributed the code to a historical fiction written in 1913 by Jose E. Marco titled Los Antiguas Leyendas de la Isla de Negros. Marco attributed the code itself to a priest named Jose Maria Pavon. Prominent Filipino historians did not dissent to Scott’s findings, but there are still some who would like to believe that the code is legitimate document. Historians utilize facts collected from primary sources of history and then draw their own reading so that their intended audience may understand the historical event, a process that in essence, “makes sense of the past.” The premise that is not all primary sources are accessible to a general audience, and without the proper training and background, a non – historian interpreting a primary source may do more harm than good – a primary source may even cause misunderstandings; sometimes, even resulting in more problems. Interpretations of the past, therefore, vary according to who reads the primary source, when it was read, and how it was read. As students of history, we must be well equipped to recognize different types of interpretations, why these may differ from each other, and how to critically sift these interpretations through historical evaluation. Interpretations of historical events change over time; thus, it is an important skill for a student of history to track these changes in an attempt to understand the past. “Sa Aking Mga Kabata” is a poem purportedly written by Jose Rizal when he was eight years old and is probably one of Rizal’s most prominent works. There is no evidence to support the claim that this poem, with the now immortalized lines “Ang hindi magmahal sa kanyang salita/mahigit sa hayop at malansang isda” was written by Rizal, and worse, the evidence against Rizal’s authorship of the poem seems all unassailable. There exists no manuscript of the poem handwritten by Rizal. The poem was first published in 1906, in a book by Hermenegildo Cruz. Cruz said he received the poem from Gabriel Beato Francisco, who claimed to have received it in 1884 from Rizal’s close friend, Saturnino Raselis. Further criticism of the poem reveals more about the wrongful attribution of the poem to Rizal. The poem was written in Tagalog and referred to the word “kalayaan.” But it was documented in Rizal’s letters that he first encountered the word through a Marcelo H. del Pilar’s translation of Rizal’s essay “El Amor Patrio” where it was spelled as “kalayahan.” While Rizal’s native tongue was Tagalog, he was educated in Spanish, starting from his mother, Teodora Alonso. Later on, he would express disappointments in his difficulty in expressing himself in his native tongue. The poem’s spelling is also suspect – the use of letters “k” and “w” to replace “c” and “u,” respectively was suggested by Rizal as an adult. If the poem was indeed written during his time, it should use the original Spanish orthography was prevalent in his time. Many of the things we accept as “true” about the past might not be the case anymore; just because these were taught to us as ”facts” when we were younger does not mean that it is set in stone – history is, after all, a construct. And as a construct, it is open for an interpretation. There might be conflicting and competing accounts of the past that need one’s attention, and can impact the way we view our country’s history and identity. It is important therefore, to subject to evaluation, not only the primary source, but also the historical interpretation of the same, to ensure that the current interpretation is reliable to support our acceptance of events of the past. Multiperspectivity With several possibilities of interpreting the past, another important concept that we must note is multiperspectivity. This can be defined as a way looking at historical events, personalities, developments, cultures, and societies from different perspectives. This means that there is a multitude of ways by which we can view the world, and each could be equally valid, and at the same time, equally partial as well. Historical writing decides on what sources to use, what interpretation to make more apparent, depending on what his end is. Historians may misinterpret evidence, attending to those that suggest that a certain event happened, and then ignore the rest that goes against the evidence. Historians may omit significant facts about their subject, which make the interpretation unbalanced. Historians may impose a certain ideology to their subject, which may not be appropriate to the period the subject was from. Historians may also provide a single cause for an even without considering other possible causal explanations of said event. These are just many of the ways a historian may fail in his historical inference, description, and interpretation. With multiperspectivity as an approach in history, we must understand that historical interpretations contain discrepancies, contradictions, ambiguities, and are often the focus of dissent. Exploring multiple perspectives in history requires incorporating source materials that reflect different views of an event in history, because singular historical narratives do not provide for space to inquire and investigate. Different sources that counter each other may create space for more investigation and research, while providing more evidence for those truths that these sources agree on. Different sources also provide different historical truths --- an official document mat note different aspects of the past, than, say, a memoir of an ordinary person on the same event. Different historical agents create different historical truths, and while this may be a burdensome work for the historian, it also renders more validity to the historical scholarship. Taking these in close regard in the reading of historical interpretations, it provides for the audience a more complex, but also a more complete and richer understanding of the past. Activity Sheet #1 Name: Score: Course & Year: Date: Course Code & Title: GE 2 – READINGS IN THE PHILIPPINE HISTORY Time: Essay. Read and explain the statements/questions given below. 1. What is Code of Kalantiaw? ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ 2. How did the Historical Interpretations utilized the poem of Rizal entitled “Sa Aking Kabata”? What makes it relevant in relation to historical interpretations? ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ 3. What is the importance of knowing the history of Code of Kalantiaw? ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ 4. What are your insights in learning the Multiperspectivity? ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ 5. What historical events of Rizal that strikes you the most? ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Reference: www.rexbookstore.com Authors: John Lee P. Candelaria Veronica C. Alphora
