Clint Ashley S.

Villanueva BSIT-602

Do you agree with Rizal's presentation of our pre-colonial history? Why or why
not?

Yes, I agree. Rizal's views on pre-colonial history are based entirely on reality.

According to Rizal's reasoning, the bloated Spanish colonial bureaucracy systematically

oppressed the Filipinos while blaming their underdevelopment on presumed indolence.

Rizal used logic and historical fact to demonstrate that this viewpoint was incorrect. To

counter the colonialist view of Filipino indolence, Rizal turned to pre-colonial history.

The evidence demonstrated that pre-colonial Filipino culture was relatively advanced,

implying that the perceived backwardness was caused by colonialism. Of course,

despite the arguments of the heavy-handed colonial government and the hierarchy of

the Roman Catholic Church, the colonial policy was repressive. Rizal referred to the

friars and propagators of light as "boasted ministers of God." These are the realities of

our pre-colonial history; Filipinos are not to blame for their misfortunes because they are

not masters of their fate. Filipinos are being forced to work, and neighboring trades have

been halted. Nonetheless, they are branded as a clone and indolence. Rizal's detractors

did not consider this evidence and maintained that Rizal's portrayal was incorrect and

insignificant.

How did Rizal envision the pre-colonial Filipinos? Why?

Rizal was able to imagine pre-colonial Filipinos through observations and fact-

finding. Rizal made some rather interesting observations, which Syed Hussein Alatas

thought were the first sociological treatment of the theme. Rizal noted that the miseries

of a nation without rights should be attributed to their rulers rather than the people
themselves. To counter the colonialist view of Filipino indolence, Rizal turned to pre-

colonial history. Rizal understood in Spanish colonial discourse, the Filipinos'

backwardness was blamed on their indolence. Filipinos, according to the Spaniards,

had a disdain for jobs. However, Filipinos' reluctance to cultivate land under feudal

overseers was interpreted by meaning and understood as the product of laziness, which

was inherent in Filipino existence. Rizal maintained that Filipinos were not innately lazy.

Furthermore, indolence was not to be regarded as a cause of backwardness. Instead, it

was colonial society's exploitative circumstances that culminated in indolence.