See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/356756843

Readings in Philippine History (Activity 1 - Critical Paper)

Article · December 2021

CITATIONS READS
0 2,744

1 author:

Naiah Mendoza
Polytechnic University of the Philippines
4 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Naiah Mendoza on 03 December 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Naiah Nicole A. Mendoza Readings in Philippine History (Activity 1)

BABR 1-2D Prof. Jacinto Valila Jr.

Tikang Tayo Ha Pilipinas:

A Critical Paper on Renato Constantino's "The Philippines: A Past Revisited"

The past cannot be viewed with our own eyes as the crow flies unless we are to go back
in time. Therefore, history as a whole is not something that can be elucidated with much
straightforwardness and faultless anecdote without thoroughly analyzing the records that are
made by historians from the past and present. More than this, Renato Constantino, in his book
entitled “The Philippines: A Past Revisited” states that to be able to present the history of the
Philippines in its true sense, there must be an assessment that eliminates the biases and influence
of our past colonizers. In this writing, he attempted to create an interpretation that showcases how
he wants Filipino history to be defined as — it is the long and arduous struggle of the masses to
free their lands of oppressors and live better lives. In this paper, I will try to briefly explain my
understanding of the events and occurrences that have happened in the history of the Philippines
during the eras of colonization, and what my grasps and comprehension are regarding
Constantino’s attempt to present the history of the Philippines in its authentic sense.

In more recent writings than the longstanding ones from the past, a lot of attempts to
eradicate the colonizers' preconceived presentation were made. However, according to
Constantino, although it was a respectable initiative to free the Philippine historical accounts of
any indication of the colonizers' culture and society, this removes the root cause and foundation
of the Philippine culture today. Whether it is a blameless thing or not, the customs or beliefs of
other nations who colonized the Philippines are correspondingly the principal ground of some of
the considered practices that are manifested today which are part of Philippine history. Thus, the
fine line between eliminating the stereotypes that are brought about by the Spanish and American
Colonizers and completely removing the Philippine history of any of its identity should be observed
so that an interpretation that still contains what the masses encountered and adapted to their own
practices will be given rise to. The said book is his effort to purge the prejudices that are evident
in the past writings and accounts of Philippine history.
 Constantino insists that history can be defined by how people tried to resist oppression for
them to be able to achieve freedom. The oppression that the Filipinos experienced in the past
propelled them to set off mass actions. These movements outstretch the awareness of the people
regarding what actually is occurring, and made them aware of what they are truly capable of. He
emphasized in the first chapter how the Filipino people, the masses who fought back and the
native Filipinos resisted oppression, and thus how the action and initiative to end colonial
oppression is unified and was able to persist through time and repelled the different colonizers
who set foot in the native land. The mass actions that happened are what made many people
recognize how they can make a change even under the oppression that they have gone through.
The Filipino masses and their desire to drive out colonial oppression is the thread that brought
together the history of the Philippines. However, it cannot be said that the colonial oppression
ultimately ended. While colonial mentality is present in our minds and way of life, it will
continuously be passed from generation to generation. “Colonial mentality is defined as the
perception of ethnic and cultural inferiority and a form of internalized racial oppression. It is
deemed a direct consequence of the Philippines’ long history of colonialism.” (Decena, 2014).
One evident proof of this phenomenon is how many Filipino people constantly try to adhere to
beauty standards influenced mostly by western or Eurocentric culture, even if the natural features
of Filipinos are greatly different from it. Although we cannot blame many Filipinos for wanting to
abide by these definitions of beauty, it cannot be denied that one of the preliminary reasons for
this consequence is the colonial oppression that has happened in the past.

In the article released online by Grid Magazine Philippines, six Filipino historians were
interviewed, and in this said interview, Xiao Chua (August 2020) states that “Filipinos tend to look
at heroes in the Western (specifically Greek) sense: they’re powerful, they’re superman. [We
think] that Rizal had extraordinary intelligence and Bonifacio had extraordinary courage. [But] this
definition actually takes away from the Filipino concept of heroism. The bayani, or “bagani,” is a
warrior: someone who serves the people without anything in return.” This shows how our views
regarding heroes are also influenced by other nations. Heroes for many, like what Chua said, are
often the specific people who are seen as very powerful, but Constantino sees heroes beyond
those classic definitions. He says in his book that the Filipino history is not a mere anecdote of
the things that the considered heroes today did during the occupation or the revolution. For him,
these heroes are considered heroes because the majority of people declared them to be. In the
same article mentioned beforehand, a professor from Western Mindanao State University, Ayshia
F. Kunting (August 2020), when talking about the Moros, states that “History is about looking at
[different] perspectives, and failing to see the contributions of Moro fighters against colonization
we lose a part of who we are—a part of [our] courage and pride as Filipinos. When we only know
of heroes who fought in Luzon or Visayas, we lose a huge part of our story. The Moro [have]
been there from the beginning: fighting for independence, for their identity, and for peace.” Thus,
in line with what Constantino wants to expound, Filipino history is not something that can be
defined by a single person or perspective, it is the collective movements and struggles of the
masses. True Filipino history gives credit to all the people who fought and does not focus only on
specific heroes. The fact that we celebrate the heroes and pioneers that we consider today are
because of the approbation and support of the masses are often overlooked.

In this book, he emphasized that in order to know why certain implications are made and
applied in the Philippines, the root cause of these practices of the colonizers must primarily be
understood. For instance, when you search the web, Spain is often said to have colonized the
Philippines because of three principal motives — to acquire goods, to propagate Christianity and
further missionaries, and to convert Filipinos into Christianism. Still, below this surface-level
information that what many commonly are aware of, a lot of factors and influences are needed to
be understood so that its impact on the Philippine history would be clearly understood. The
Philippines was not liberated nor colonized for their own good, it was a result of the propagandas
that are brought about by the colonizers to make people think that they are not hiding a personal
agenda to gain more for their own land. This was emphasized by Constantino when he wrote
“liberation” multiple times mentioning the purported enlightened aspects that have happened in
the country, which are also in quotations. Implying that he does not accept as true that the
Philippines was liberated, but on contrary, the country was only robbed off of its individual and
natural identity and growth.

During the Spanish colonization era or the so-called first “liberation”, as what Constantino
named the second chapter of his book, Spain was in the course of adhering to a new economic
system. Although feudalism was in practice during these times, he says that capitalistic
inscriptions can be seen throughout the years of the country being colonized, specifically in its
economic facet. This economic system inhibited social and economic disparity, “A patriarchal or
matriarchal government unit is obviously feudal. Observations of the mode of political leadership
in local government units further reveal how the chair of a barangay (originally a barrio within the
jurisdiction of a pueblo or municipality or town), mayor of a municipality or city, or governor of a
province acts and dispenses authority like a landlord — worse still, like a taskmaster who treats
constituents as if they are tenants, vassals or slaves. The latter become beholden to those in
power as this political relation is intensified socio-culturally by the value of utang na loob (or debt
of gratitude) which is inherently and automatically spawned by this vicious, and hence corrupt,
mode of power dispensation.” (News Junkie Post, 2013) In consequence, exploitation of the
people from Spain’s colonies was very much prevalent. During this period, the economic activity
of Spain is centered in towns and the middle classes are climbing up the ladder. And in order to
understand why such occurrences happened, Constantino presents that we must recognize and
study its previous accounts before delving into its impact on the history of the Philippines. The
history of the reconquista, the catholic monarchs, and colonial ventures are some of the past
undertakings that are tackled. Mercantilism was said as a manifestation of capitalism and since
Spain was in its transition during this era, they needed to colonize more lands to gain and increase
capital. However, as they gain more power in their Northern American colonies, their reliance
towards these nations also grew larger. And with this mercantilist approach, comes the greedy
desire to advance more, which in this sense is to discover sources of metal. This pushed Spain
to be dependent on the Netherlands and England, paying them gold bought from its colonies to
acquire their productions. In short, Spain became dependent on both, allowing the economy of
the latter to advance leaving Spain behind.

For them to take over lands and colonize equitably, they must take advantage of
something that is enough to be a justifiable reason. In the case of Spain, religion was used as a
facade for these schemes and ventures. Instilling in the people from their colonies’ brains that
they are to colonize because they are to enlighten them and save them from their beliefs. These
practices were supported by the catholic church which thus seemingly fleeces the fact that these
practices were initially also for their feudalistic agendas. “Catholicism and the Spanish state were
inseparable, and the religious played a predominant role in the administration of the Philippines.
As a result, they were deeply implicated in the exploitation of Filipinos; religious orders including
the Augustinians, Dominicans, and Recollects, held the largest tracts of land, haciendas, and
encomiendas granted by the Spanish government, renting plots to tenant farmers.” (Harvard
Divinity School: Catholicism in the Philippines, 2021) This shows how powerful these people have
become gaining a lot for their personal and colonialistic wishes. In the same article, it was
mentioned that “By the late Spanish colonial period, the Catholic orders and their friars were the
wealthiest and most politically powerful elements within Filipino society”. Nonetheless, this belief
was not able to make the whole country succumb to it. By the time of their arrival, Islam has been
an existing belief for the people of the southern islands. That being said, a lot of historians
mentioned that if Magellan or other colonizers did not set foot in the country by the time that they
did, they would have tried to colonize a country with an already existing Islamic belief. Even so,
the resistance of the people from the south stirred the Spanish-Moro wars. Constantino says that
if we had not been colonized, many of us today may have been Muslim, and that we were able to
discover advancement on our own beliefs and practices.

When the Spanish colonizers arrived in the country, it was said that the existing societies
that they encountered are already in transition. Different societies and social classes were on their
way to their emergence. It was said that the indigenous societies that were present during that
time were not developed the way that they should have been because of colonialism. Trades
between different communities like the Muslims and traders from different nations happened,
although it did not give much of an economic enhancement. In his book, Constantino states that
“Spanish colonialism arrested the natural development of the native communities, but it also laid
the basis for a unification of the archipelago which was to be the very cause of an awakening that
would end the days of Castilian overlordship in this part of the world.” But then again, he said that
this allowed the Filipino people to understand where they are and be conscious of the unjust
system that was occurring. And therefore allowed them to gain awareness and progress against
colonialists in the following years. Given the drastic rise of the social classes because of the
Hispanic colonizers’ influence, the pacification and exploitation of the native Filipino people also
came about. In the fourth chapter of Constantino’s work, the haciendas, encomienda system,
exploitation of workers, land grant, and the use of native people to strengthen the colonial
administration were addressed throughout. The collection of tributes and their exploitation and
abuses are some of the results of the acts of corruption that were made by the encomenderos.
Thus, overall affected the political and economic position of the countries then. It is sad to note
how also some native leaders who lead their communities are also a participant in the exploitation
of their communities to fuel their personal gain. The Philippines was not as rich in mines as the
previous colonies of the Spaniards are, specifically in South America. However, the country
remained a colony because they considered the Philippines as a stepping stone that can aid them
in taking over China and Japan as per the people of the church. More than this, the colony is said
to be a base and a defense outpost of the Hispanics.

When we look back at the history of the Philippines, one major aspect is the exploitation
of Filipinos and the monastic supremacy that occurred at that time. Since the church is a major
component of the Spanish colonial period, it was said that the church and state operated together.
Basically, they are abiding by the king and God, the church and the state. Friars are acquiring
lands from village to village, using the money from the church fees or downright stealing them
from the villagers. Farmers gain little to none since they were being exploited and robbed of their
lands and became tenants in the own land that they are taking care of. The priests used them
and took half of their harvests while the farmers remained poor. During the reign of Phillip II, in its
earlier days, a law was enacted for the natives yet it was then retracted by the friars. The abuses
that the friars did continued and reached the extent of denying the Bulakenos of their own lands
and creating sidelines just so they can extract money from the people. Their influence on the
people’s morals made them powerful enough to institute an economic power of their own.
Constantino mentioned that “The early ascendancy of the Church over the State was made
possible by the success with which the friars undertook, almost single-handedly, the pacification
of the country.” A lot of acts of exploitation happened during their reign, and it can never be
justified. The supremacy of the friars is indeed evident and prevalent during these times, more
than the king. The more established communities are and the administrative prerogatives of the
friars, the more the decline is in the missionary zeal and the greater the cruelties are. Because of
these abuses and exploitation, more and more individuals gain consciousness and realized that
they are experiencing abuses back and forth. Anti-friar sentiments arise as well, therefore catering
to space for revolt against the friars and the church.

These struggles pushed the people to understand that they are a nation and therefore
shall be united. The extreme exploitation of the people heated their desire to start a rebellion.
However, Constantino mentioned that these rebellions were more of a negative repercussion
rather than a positive one. He also added that these responses were started by how the societies
were during that time, so the features of each society during this period must also be regarded. It
was evident in his book how he wanted the readers to understand how we can only appreciate
the context of the events that occurred by being knowledgeable about both sides of the societies.
 The native groups initially tried to make the Spanish intruders leave the motherland. The
war of Lapu-lapu against Ferdinand Magellan is said to be one of the earliest efforts to drive the
invaders away. Constantino also cited other earlier attempts to do such. Lakandula and Soliman,
gaining motivation from Lapu-lapu tried to do the same. The resistance of the natives is forced by
the acts that the colonizers are doing like the punishing method of collection of tributes. This revolt
was able to put a pause in the tribute collection for three years. However, although revolts are
taking place, there are also Filipino people that betrayed and renounced their loyalty from the
plans that they made. Unfortunately, although people’s resistance is present, not all of these
succeeded since the colonizers has their own tactics and methods. They tried to win over the
chiefs and made them betray their people. This incidence started a more rapid formation of social
classes which further divides the people. Some resistance was initiated by the belief that the
Catholic religion should be rejected and the natives should adhere to their own and definite beliefs.
It cannot also be disregarded how there are chiefs who made use of these rebellions to gain more
for their own. Juan Macapagal became a loyal defender of the king and Governor Manrique de
Larawas said to not have started an actual revolt. “In the long history of the people’s struggle
against their colonial masters, there would be numerous other occasions when their own leaders
would barter their cause for selfish advantage.” Constantino wrote. Yet there were also revolts
that lasted for a long time like that of the Boholanos spearheaded by Francisco Dagohoy. It lasted
for eighty-five years from 1744 until 1829. Boholanos adopted the religion of Catholicism but that
did not stop that rebellion. For they are not after expunging the belief but rather are against the
exploitation and unjust systems and acts that oppress the Filipino masses.

During the British occupation period, Diego Silang whose both parents are from the
principalia was the Ilocano who led the rebellion of his people. The rebellion that he led lasted for
five months. “The Silang revolt, though it lasted a scant five months from December 14, 1762 to
May 28, 1763, is important because it provides us with the prototype of the ilustrado leadership
of the nineteenth century.” Constantino wrote. He said that analyzing the movement of the leaders
and societies throughout this time is something that gave us an understanding of the evolving
type of leadership that happened during Silang's revolt. Silang as well was not specifically against
the belief in the Catholic faith but was against the abuses that were happening. He was somehow
able to abolish the tribute collection and forced labor. Silang then became a puppet to the British,
wrote a letter to King George III to gain his favor. Nevertheless, Diego Silang was shot dead by
an assassin, and her wife Gabriela Silang took over his spouse’s rebel force to take revenge for
his death but then unfortunately been hanged after four months. Silang was said to be a leader
who capitalized on the people’s genuine remonstrations. But then again, Constantino mentioned
that this prevalence did not necessarily go to waste. These revolts and uprising are what
Constantino said to be a factor that aided their realization of the fact that they can be strong and
can fight for their people and motherland. “Each successive uprising was a step in their political
awakening. Each local revolt was a contribution to national consciousness.” Constantino said.

With all of the events that took place, the author described in chapter 10 of part II of his
work how the revolution and nationhood of the country ignited. He mentioned that there were
articulators who contributed to the emerging national consciousness. These people are in the
social classes who have the chance to acquire the benefits of the country’s rising economy during
that time period — the ilustrados. La Liga Filipina and the Katipunan or the KKK spearheaded by
Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio consecutively are some examples. Although many opinions and
views are contradicting each other regarding the two, Constantino has written how this non-violent
reform society and a revolutionary group came about and how it fought for the country in its own
ways only, which is in line with the objectives of his writing; to view the Philippine history without
biased views and opinion and present the events that happened as it is. As a general view, allow
me to cite two articles that give an overview of both groups. “It [La Liga Filipina] was formed not
for the purpose of independence, but for mutual aid and protection of its members, and the
fostering of a more united spirit among Filipinos. Its constitution declared the ends, form, duties
of members and officials, rights of members and officials, the investment of funds, and general
rules.” (The Kahimyang Project, 2011) “The Katipunan was dedicated to the expulsion of the
Spanish from the islands, and preparations were made for armed revolt. There had been many
Filipino rebels throughout the history of Spanish rule, but now for the first time they were inspired
by nationalist ambitions and possessed the education needed to make success a real possibility.”
(Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia, July 2020) A single paper cannot possibly contain all
of the events and movements that took place in our long and notable history. However, it is
important to note that all of these figures and aspects are important so that we can truly
understand our history. “The 17th-century English writer John Milton was an early believer in
revolution’s inherent ability to help a society realize its potential. He also saw revolution as the
right of society to defend itself against abusive tyrants, creating a new order that reflected the
needs of the people. To Milton, revolution was the means of accomplishing freedom.” (Britannica,
The Editors of Encyclopaedia, February 2020) From rebellion to revolution, how the people gained
consciousness and tried to defend themselves from the inherent and inhumane abuses that are
prevalent in the motherland during the time of colonization. This is what the author of “The
Philippines: A Past Revisited”, Renato Constantino also tried to expound in his writing — how the
Filipino masses, the people who realized who they really were, are the facets that granted and
helped us have the present that we are living through today.

After all of the happenings from the beginning of the colonization of the Philippines until
the start of the rebellion and the revolution of the Filipino people, on July 4, 1946, the country
gained its independence. Contrary to common beliefs, Constantino emphasizes that the United
States did not grant the country freedom or independence. For many, he said that Filipinos were
not able to grasp the reality that the Americans colonized the Philippines. Colonial mentality and
colonial miseducation were some of the prevalent reasons why the realization was further
suppressed. And having been a colonized nation for long, the practices and beliefs of these
colonizers were adapted even to the deepest roots of the country. Per se the Filipinization of
colonial administration, he believes that it obstructs the countrymen from seeing the total reality.
Likewise, the bourgeois expansion and the separation of classes are what he believes additionally
prevented the Filipinos to achieve such understanding as to what is befalling in the motherland.

Through all of the information presented and the events that took place, we can see how
a lot of events that happened in our history were driven by greed and desire for power and control
over the majority. Even though we cannot go back to the specific time that these historical events
happened, we can use these as a lesson that we can bring and share with the generations to
come. Through writings like this, we can genuinely comprehend its effects on our society and
ourselves. “The Spanish colonial period left these marks on Filipino culture—residues that last
even today. You have things like religion, our last names, and everyday words in Tagalog and
other Philippine dialects.” (Ocampo, 2018) Now that not many people are aware of the
implications of colonialism to the Filipino people and our society, we must know better where our
history is rooted and why certain beliefs are the way they are. The more we can understand our
long colonial history, the more we are to know our true roots and selves as Filipinos.
 Can history be possibly presented without the subjective views and beliefs of its writers?
And is the history that we are taught during our early years includes faults and biases in them?
Such questions settled in my mind when I first laid my eyes on Renato Constantino’s “The
Philippines: A Past Revisited”. Reading how he wanted to create an anecdote that is free from
colonialist expressions and prejudice, I was implored and intrigued at the same time. His goal of
being able to explain why such practices were brought in the country and why it must be still
instilled in the minds of the people in the present are somehow attained, and the recognition that
should have long been for the masses is given. After all, we cannot go back in the history of our
country’s struggle with our own feet. We are to use the eyes and ears of the Filipino masses who
are present in the past so we could have a gist of what actually transpired during these times.
Renato Constantino’s endeavor and objective in this book were presented in a way wherein the
reader will easily know where the author stands and what their opinions are. However, the said
book is not something that can be read and understood through the typical way of reading. It
requires patience and thorough analysis for it to be sincerely interpreted. And as for someone
who has to juggle a lot of responsibilities at once, it was never easy. Yet it was a read that will
constantly be recalled and thought of.

In conclusion, the history of the Philippines is not something that is owned by specific
people, heroes, or races. The true Filipino history is one that is rooted in its true cause and is
made possible by the masses. Without these people who fought collectively and struggled for so
many years to hold the country together, there will be no unifying thread of our history and identity.
Although highly influenced by the colonizers, the country’s true nature and essence cannot be
taken away from its own history because of the people who are constantly trying to address the
false information and beliefs that are imprinted long ago in our ancestors’ minds. Fairly, it must
be something that not many Filipino think of, but the country really is still heavily influenced by its
past colonizers. Having accounts like Renato Constantino’s “The Philippines: A Past Revisited”
that the people can go back to will be fruitful for the next generation to come. Tikang tayo ha
Pilipinas, a Waray phrase that translates to “we are from the Philippines”. Hence, our history
should also come from the Filipinos who fought for the country’s freedom and witnessed how the
true Filipino history has come to place.
 References:

6 Filipino Historians Talk National Heroes. (2020, August). Grid Magazine. Retrieved from

https://www.gridmagazine.ph/story/6-filipino-historians-talk-national-heroes.

Blancaflor, S. (2019, April 23). 120 years after philippine independence from spain, hispanic

influence remains. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-

america/120-years-after-philippine-independence-spain-hispanic-influence-remains-

n912916.

Catholicism in the Philippines. (2021). Religion and Public Life at Harvard Divinity School.

Retrieved from https://rpl.hds.harvard.edu/faq/catholicism-philippines.

Constantino, R., Constantino L. (1975). The Philippines: A Past Revisited. Tala Publishing

Services.

Decena, A. M. (2014). Identity, colonial mentality, and decolonizing the mind: Exploring

narratives and examining mental health implications for Filipino Americans. Smith

ScholarWorks. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses/769/.

Feudalism and Colonialism: The Case of the Philippines | NEWS JUNKIE POST. (2013, August

8). News Junkie Post. Retrieved from http://newsjunkiepost.com/2013/08/08/feudalism-

and-colonialism-the-case-of-the-philippines/.

Propaganda movement | facts, definition, & history. (2020, July 15). Encyclopedia Britannica.

Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Propaganda-Movement.

Revolution | politics. (2020, February 24). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from

https://www.britannica.com/topic/revolution-politics.
 Today in Philippine history, July 3, 1892, Dr. Jose Rizal founded the La Liga Filipina. (2011,

November 8). The Kahimyang Project. Retrieved from

https://kahimyang.com/kauswagan/articles/735/today-in-philippine-history-july-3-1892-dr-

jose-rizal-founded-the-la-liga-filipina.

View publication stats