MODULE 1: Understanding History Using Primary

and Secondary Sources

Objectives: After successful completion of the

module, you should be able to: Identify the
meaning of history, distinction of primary and
secondary sources Evaluate primary sources for
their credibility, authenticity and provenance 1.1
Meaning and Relevance of History Questions:
What do you know about history? Do you know
the history of the Philippines? What are the
sources of history? Background Information
History was derived from the Greek word historia
which means “knowledge acquired through inquiry
or investigation.” History as a discipline existed for
around 2,400 years and is as old as mathematics
and philosophy. This term was then adapted to
classical Latin where it acquired a new definition.
Historia became known as the account of the past
of a person or of a group of people through written
documents and historical evidences. That meaning
stuck until the early parts of the twentieth century.
History became an important academic discipline.
History has always been known as the study of the
past. Students of General Education often dread
the subject for its notoriety in requiring them to
memorize dates, places, names, and events from
distant eras. A more contemporary definition is
centered on how it impacts the present through its
consequences. Geoffrey 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 judgements.”
Such judgements of historians on how the past
should be seen make the foundation of historical
interpretation. 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
is that 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 even cause
misunderstanding; sometimes, even resulting
more problems. Interpretation 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.

1.2 Distinction Between Primary and Secondary

Sources, External and Internal Criticisms,
Repositories of Primary Source Primary sources
are firsthand, contemporary accounts of events
created by individuals during that period of time or
several years later (such as correspondence,
diaries, memoirs and personal histories). These
original records can be found in several media
such as print, artwork, and audio and visual
recording. Examples of primary sources include
manuscripts, newspapers, speeches, cartoons,
photographs, video, and artifacts. Primary sources
can be described as those sources that are closest
to the origin of the information. They contain raw
information and thus, must be interpreted by
researchers. Secondary sources are closely
related to primary sources and often interpret
them. These sources are documents that relate to
information that originated elsewhere. Secondary
sources often use generalizations, analysis,
interpretation, and synthesis of primary sources.
Examples of secondary sources include textbooks,
articles, and reference books. External criticism is
the practice of verifying the authenticity of
evidence by examining its physical characteristics;
consistency with the historical characteristics of
the time when it was produced; and the materials
used for the evidence.

Example of the things that will be examined when

conducting external criticism of a document
include the quality of the paper, the type of the ink,
and the language and words used in the material,
among others. Internal criticism, on the other hand,
is the examination of the truthfulness of the
evidence. It looks at the content of the source and
examines the circumstance of its production.
Internal criticism looks at the truthfulness and
factuality of the evidence by looking at the author
of the source, its context, the agenda behind its
creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its
intended purpose, among others. For example,
Japanese reports and declarations during the
period of the war should not be taken as a
historical fact hastily. It entails that the historian
acknowledge and analyze how such reports can
be manipulated to be used as war propaganda.

1.3 Comparative Analysis of Primary and

Secondary Sources Primary sources provide a
first-hand account of an event or time period and
are considered to be authoritative. They represent
original thinking, reports on discoveries or events,
or they can share new information. Often these
sources are created at the time the events
occurred but they can also include sources that
are created later. They are usually the first formal
appearance of original research. Secondary
sources involve analysis, synthesis, interpretation,
or evaluation of primary sources. They often
attempt to describe or explain primary sources
Scholarly journals, although generally considered
to be secondary sources, often contain articles on
very specific subjects and may be the primary
ssource of information on new developments.
Primary and secondary categories are often not
fixed and depend on the study or research you are
undertaking. For example, newspaper
editorial/opinion pieces can be both primary and
secondary. If exploring how an event affected
people at a certain time, this type of source would
be considered a primary source. If exploring the
event, then the opinion piece would be responding
to the event and therefore is considered to be a
secondary source.

Examples of primary sources i​nclude:

diaries,
correspondence,
ships'logs original documents e.g. birth
certificates, trial transcripts biographies,
autobiographies, manuscripts interviews,
speeches, oral histories case law, legislation,
regulations, constitutions government documents,
statistical data, research reports a journal article,
reporting, research or findings creative art works,
literature

Secondary sources offer an analysis,

interpretation or a restatement of primary sources
and are considered to be persuasive. They often
involve generalization, synthesis, interpretation,
commentary or evaluation in an attempt to
convince the reader of the creator's argument.
They often attempt to describe or explain primary
sources.
Examples of secondary sources i​nclude:
journal articles that comment on or analyze
research textbooks dictionaries and
encyclopedias books that interpret, analyze
political commentary biographies dissertations
newspaper editorial/opinion pieces criticism of
literature, art works or music
Self - Check
D​irections: Write true if the statement is true.
Otherwise, write false in the space provided.

___________1. History is the study of the past.

___________2. Historical sources that were not
written should not be used in writing history.
___________3. History has no use for the present,
thus, the saying “past is past” is true.
___________4. History is limited to the story of a
a hero versus a villain.
___________5. There are three types of sources:
primary, secondary, and tertiary sources.
___________6. External criticism is done by
examining the physical characteristics of a source.
___________7. Internal criticism is done by
looking at a source’s quality of paper and type of
ink, among others.
___________8. Only primary sources may be
used in writing history.
___________9. The subject historiography is
history itself.
__________10. The historians are the only source
of history.