INTRODUCTION TO HISTORY

History as a field of discipline has already existed some 2,400 years ago alongside the
disciplines of mathematics and philosophy (Alporha & Candelaria, 2018). It takes its roots from
Ancient Greece, particularly derived from the word historia which means “inquiry” or
comprehensively, knowledge that result from inquiries or probes. Herodotus, regarded as the
“Father of History”, wrote about the wars that happened between the Greeks and the Persians
which primarily came from his inquiries regarding the wars and the conditions that caused them
to happen (Jayapalan, 2002). His work was later named as “Histories of Herodotus”.

However, following this monumental work of Herodotus, little to no efforts was made in coming
up with a standard definition of history. How do we define history? There have been contesting
points in the attempt to define what history is. And these ideas come from different vantage
points or perspectives of whoever defines it. In view of that, they also take different approaches
in studying history. Because of that, historical interpretations constantly change and evolve.
Thus, the dynamism of history as a field of inquiry. To understand history is not obtained from a
study of facts and dates, but from the acquisition of the knowledge and skills in reading and
interpreting the past.

In the mainstream, history is the study of the past – the date, time, and place of various
historical events. The most common orientation in teaching history demands that one has to
memorize all these details. It is because of this that students of history often dread the study of
the discipline which veers away from looking at the historical significance of these events. While
the definition is not necessarily wrong, it fails to acknowledge the inherent complexity of history
as a subject matter.

Someone who studies and interprets the past is called a historian. He/She is not a blank slate.
Traditionally, there is a high regard for evidences among historians and a firm subscription to
the positivist approach (David, n.d.). The historians sort through these documents and only
present those which significantly align his/her worldview. What he/she decides to focus on is
largely determined not by his personal choice but by the rigorous knowledge and trainings that
he/she acquired through time. The typical historical accounts that historians make are those that
talk about great men of the past – heroes, warriors, freedom fighters – and narratives of
colonization, wars, struggles for independence, and other important breakthroughs. While these
literatures dominate stories of the past, other historians attempt to provide people with different
lenses through which histories can be interpreted. Different and/or new perspectives will enable
us to come up with critical analyses of the present contexts of society and beings.

IN PERSPECTIVES: DEFINITIONS OF HISTORY

Recall that historians employ different approaches and perspectives in making sense of the
past. Following this fact, there have also been attempts to define history in various point of
views. Some of these definitions formulated by scholars are as follows:

1. History is philosophy drawn from examples. (Dionysius of Halicarnassus)

o Philosophy means the study of ideas about knowledge, truth, the nature and
meaning of life of etc. In view of the definition, Dionysius meant that history is
philosophy in itself, which puts to its core study about human life but that which
uses real-life examples or experiences.
2. The end and scope of all history is to teach us by example of times past such wisdom as
may guide our desires and actions. (Sir Walter Raleigh)
o In the end, history is geared towards the inculcation of learning and wisdom
which will guide individuals or groups of them in the conduct of their daily life.
Such wisdom is set to direct their actions consciously avoiding committing past
mistakes all over again. Raleigh accentuated the idea that wisdom is far greater
than mere intellectual alertness.
3. It is an account of the unchanging past. (Aristotle)
o The past is something that is fixed. We cannot undo whatever is done or said in
the past. He furthered that even God Himself cannot change it.
4. What experience and history teach is this – that people and governments never have
learnt anything from history; acted on principles deducted from it. (Hegel)
o This is somewhat a pessimistic view of history. Hegel stressed that people have
never really learnt from the mistakes done before. The consequences of the First
World War, if people took them into account, might not have led to the Second
World War which gave way for the great holocaust to happen. History is a
collection of experiences set for us to draw insights from in order to right what
were done wrong before.
5. The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. (Karl Marx)
o Every society is divided into what Marx called as the social classes. These
classes are differentiated in terms of the “ownership of the means of production
and the relations of production” or the conflicting interests of the classes. Say, a
landlord versus the peasants, workers versus the capitalists, etc. This political
tension and economic antagonism is what sets the two forces in conflictual
relationship, being in a constant struggle for power. In particular, Marx employed
his materialistic interpretation of history which is anchored on the evolution of
societies in terms their material or economic bases. Materialism simply means
that it is matter or material reality which is the basis for an change.
6. All history is contemporary history. (Croce)
o By this, Croce meant that past events became history only when they are
contemplated by the historians and so history materializes only in the historians
thought. Because historians operate in the modern-day world, so to speak, all
history is contemporary history.
7. History is a continuous process of interaction between the historian and his facts, an
unending dialogue between the present and the past. (E.H. Carr)
o As long as time unfolds, history progresses. This exemplifies the constant
interaction of the historians and the facts they interpret which emphasizes the
practical value of the discipline to human lives, thus, the application of the past in
the present context. The relationship between the past and the present cannot
and will never be denied.
8. The philosophy of history is concerned neither with the past by itself, nor with historian’s
thought about it by itself, but with the two things in their mutual relations. (R.G.
Collingwood)
 o History cannot be concerned with facts about the past alone, nor the historian’s
thoughts alone, but the combination of both. The past shall work with the
historians’ interpretation so as to give sense as to why and how the study of the
discipline is relevant to the present context.
9. History is the historians’ experience. (M. Gakeshott)
o Historians write history. The narratives they make are products of the knowledge
they acquired from trainings, lectures, conferences, etc. that they attended. It is
their years of engagements and experiences that they were able to create
interpretations of the past events.
10. History is the record of what has happened in the past, of anything that has ever
happened in the past however long ago or however recently. (G. Kitson Clark)
o Broadly, for Clark, what happened in the past is what constitutes history
regardless of how recent or long ago the event happened.
11. History is a story about the past that is significant and true. (Crabtree, David)
o History simplifies events in the past. The historian trims down everything that
could be said about an even into what is important or significant. This aspect is
determined by the historians in reference to the knowledge they obtained from
their years of capacity training involvements. However, such significance,
according to Crabtree, should be approved by other historians. Otherwise, it
would not be considered as such. By the term “true”, he meant all perspectives
well-supported by facts.
12. History is past politics and politics is present history. (J.R. Seeley)
o The definition is reflective of the inherent relationship between history and
politics. For just as history encompasses all human activity, so does politics. The
two disciplines are inseparable. In every relationship, there are structures and
shadows of power. And the central component to the study of politics is power.
History is a narrative of the power struggles that happened before. Whereas,
politics as present history means the power struggles of today are historical
narratives in the years to come.
13. History is a story of things worthy of being remembered. (Polybius & Thucydides)
o History is about the things, people, and events in the past that/who are worthy of
note.
14. It is a discipline that makes men wise. (Sir Francis Bacon)
o History gives people the wisdom to create productive decisions – those which will
help them avoid repeating the errors of the past.
15. It is the art of choosing from among many lies that one which most resembles the truth.
(Jean-Jacques Rousseau)
o Because there is no way to go back to the past to validate historical narratives,
Rousseau regarded everything about the past as lies, and the historian’s role is
to choose from among these one which mostly resembles the truth. This is on the
idea that no account can ever give a perfectly accurate story of the past events.
16. History in the broader sense is everything that ever happened, and we have to limit our
understanding and study those events that are very significant and have left behind a
deep impression on man (Henry Johnson)
 o History is about the past, particularly past events which gave impact to mankind
and are thus significant.
17. What men have done and said, above all what they have thought – that is history. (Prof.
Maitland)
o The line “what men have done and said” includes all that man has uttered and
accomplished in his material, moral and spiritual life. By “have thought”, he
meant not mere thinking, but thinking new things; it is thought aimed at improving
what has so far been achieved. Maitland’s emphasis on thoughts shows proof of
his faith in the progress of human mind, which could be equated to the growth of
civilization which is the theme of history.
18. History is nothing but the biography of great men and that it is a record of human
accomplishment, particularly of great souls. (Carlyle)
o It is true that all great changes in history cannot be regarded as due to
impersonal forces or as independent of individual control. There is a genius who
made history happen. While that is true, it is equally important to emphasize the
contribution of the general mass in the enthusiasm for the all-creating Hero.
19. History is the unfolding story of human freedom. (Lord Acton)
o History includes accounts about advancements in civilizations and how freedom
was attained after eras of colonization, empire-building, and wars. Men are most
likely to unveil their potentials in an environment where they get to enjoy freedom
which essentially leads to progress.
20. History is essentially the record of the life of men in societies in their geographical and
their physical environment. (A.L. Rowse)
o The emphasis of the definition is on collective effort. It is collective effort that
makes men able to secure a mastery over a particular environment or
geographical area. As such, development is the result of such collective effort. It
could be the case that Rowse also would look at how the environment of men
influences their attitudes and behaviors.
21. History is a science that investigates and presents in their context of psycho-physical
causality the facts determined by space and time of the evolution of men in their
individual as well as typical and collective activity as social beings. (Ernest Bernheim)
o The definition of Bernheim stresses the “science” aspect of history as that which
establishes and proves causal relationships of facts in a particular space and
time in the evolution of mankind and at the same includes discussions on the
collective activities that they engaged in as social beings.

These definitions, no matter how related or different they are from one another, give us an
understanding and better elucidation of what history is, what happened to mankind and why it
happened to them. Simply, they can all be trimmed to the events in the past, specifying certain
qualifiers as to what for them can be counted as history. They serve as guiding propositions in
discourses as regards history. And it remains a fact that as a particular voice is highlighted in
their interpretations, some parts of the narrative are either unintentionally or even deliberately
muted.

In order to clearly distinguish the traditional from modern history, it is important to take note of
this distinction by Henry Funtecha:
 TRADITIONAL DEFINITIONS
1. History is the record of the past.
2. History is a record of the human past from the time written records began to appear.
a. The above definitions are weak because they view history as based merely
on written records.
b. According to Gottschalk, history is actuality; hence it must study the past as it
happened. The demands that the historian abandon the present. The
practical value of studying, and using the past to understand the present is
lost. History is studied, written, and taught for its own sake.
c. Interviews or oral history and oral traditions, and cultural artifacts are not
considered.
d. The notion of “no written record, no history” has confined history to the literate
and articulate and has resulted in the production of historiographies from
upper-class male perspectives.

MODERN DEFINITIONS
1. History is the reconstruction of the past based on written records, oral history,
cultural artifacts and folk traditions.
2. It is the imaginative reconstruction of the past, the study of events concerning people
in the past.
3. Aside from recording, a historian should do two other important tasks:
a. To interpret facts in an orderly and intelligible manner, and
b. To discover patterns and trends which govern the behavior of people and of
nations, and to make generalizations from them
4. Therefore, history is the interpretative and imaginative study of surviving records of
the past, either written or unwritten, in order to determine the meaning and scope of
human existence.

The abovementioned definitions of history illustrate how comprehensive the scope of history is.
As long as time unfolds, the study of history can never be complete. The task is therefore left on
the part of the historians to continually seek and provide meaning to historical facts as well as
emphasize the continuing relevance of history for both the present and the future.

SOURCES OF HISTORY

There are two general sources with which historical data can be taken from: (1) primary, and (2)
secondary. The former refers to the materials produced at the same time as the event, period,
or subject being studied. Meanwhile, the latter speaks of sources which were produced by an
author with the use of primary sources. Other literatures would mention of tertiary sources which
utilized secondary sources in its publication.

Furthermore, historical sources can also be classified into: (1) written or inscribed sources, (2)
graphic/visual materials and artifacts, (3) folklore/oral literature, and (4) oral history through
interviews. Written/inscribed sources include birth and death certificates, marriage certificates,
directories, church records, letters and diaries, local newspapers, census reports, title deeds,
surveyor’s notes, school records, government records, business records, police records, books,
souvenir programs, hospital records, and inscriptions, among others. Graphic/Visual materials
and artifacts consist of photographs, heirlooms and keepsakes, arts and crafts, tools, weapons
and utensils, old structures and landmarks, and skeletal remains with funerary furniture and
paraphernalia, among others. Songs, epics, myths, superstitions are some of the examples
comprising the folklore/oral literature.

Figure 1. (L-R) Written/Inscribed Sources and Graphic/Visual Materials and Arts

Because one cannot just accept the content of historical sources without question, it is important
to thoroughly examine them in order to avoid deception and be able to come up with the
historical truth. In general, there are two processes intended for historians to utilize in search for
truth. On the one hand is the external criticism. This is intended for verifying the authenticity of a
particular source or evidence through scrutiny of its physical characteristics, its consistency with
the historical characteristic of the time when it was produced, and the materials used for the
evidence. The things that need to be examined include the quality of the paper, the type of the
ink, and the language and words used in the material, among others.

On the other hand, the examination on the veracity of the content of historical sources is what is
termed as internal criticism. Aside from the content, it also checks the circumstance of the
production. Further, it looks at the author of the source, its context, the agenda behind its
creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended purpose, among others. Internal
criticism is important in order to determine if the content of the material is used as a propaganda
as in the case of Japanese reports and declarations during the period of the war.

In the end, the validation of historical sources is one important process to note. It is through this
that truths in history are arrived at. The idea worthy of emphasis here is the fact that the use of
unverified, falsified, and untruthful historical sources can lead to equally false conclusions.