he picture above was taken from the Boxcr Codex, a

manuscript write
ritten
around 1595 which contains illustrations of ethnolinguistic groups in th
Philippines at the time of Spanish contact in the 16th century. The pictu
ure
illustrates members Tagalog nobility, which confirms that ancient Philippine
of the
ilippine
souety was alreadv highly sophisticated, as shown by the manner of dressing of the
carly people gold all over their body. Ihe existence of social
and the adornment of
hicrarchy in carly Philippine societies contradicts the Spaniards claim that the natives
of the Philppine islands were savages and uncivilized before they came, and that it was
only the Spaniards who ushered us into a period of civilization. In this lesson, students
are capected to learn and understand that it is important to advocate a Filipino perspec
the study of Philippine history and society, in order to understand
tive, cspecially in
and appreciate Filipino identity. We will now turn to Pantayong Pananaw as a Filipino
in the study of Social Sciences.
perspcctive
 have been studiedue
culture, and sociery
For a long time, Philippine history,
After all, the first
chroniclers were Spaniards so they recorded +
Even when propagandisto
their estem
observa
perspective.
perspective as
Westerners. ch as Jose
tions using their own Graciano Lopez-Jaena
defended Philinn.ne history
Marcelo H. Del Pilar, and fra
Rizal, still within the colonial
framewor for
and culture in the 19th
century, they were

Western. they
colonizers and argue using
were compelled to use
the language of the
nationalist in perspective
standar
writin hd
This isPhiwhere
lip-
who advocateda
There w e r e Filipino historians in the glish language.
English
but m o s t of them
still chose to write
pine history advocating the use of the
of the
the contribution of Pantayong
Pananaw
society
lies-in
Filipino
language in history and understanding
writing

HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF
PANTAYONG PANANAW
Pananaw as a ilipino social Scionence
As mentioned in the previous chapter, Pantayong
with Sikolohiyang Pilipino in psychol
perspective was born in the 1970s, alongside
According to Filipino historian Portia Reyes, the
of Martial anthropology.
andPilipinolohiya in
imposition Law, with its accompanying elements of repression, oppressinn
of the search for national identis.
and suppression, paved the way for the proliferation tity,
Western encroachment in all
one which aims to promote
nationalism and freedom trom
Martial rule aimed to control not only politics and socieu
aspects of life (Reyes, 2002).
but also the intellectual life of the Filipinos. As part of the government's propaganda, it
The result was the Tadhana series.
came out with its own version of Philippine history.
an encyclopaedia of Philippine history. A group of intellectuals from the University of
(UP), Diliman was assigned to write this project but under the author
the Philippin
Ferdinand E. Marcos.
shipAtofthat time, the leftist movement, the Communist Party of the Philippines, also
Past Revisited by Renato
had its own version of Philippine history: The Philippines: A
Constantino. It utilized the Marxist structural analysis in the examination and inter-
intellectual activists, this provided a
pretation of the Filipino peoples history. For the
better alternative to the government's own version of Philippine history. In this book,
Western imperialism is seen as the culprit behind the Filipino people's social ills, and
the government's role in serving the imperialist interests further aggravates the situation

(Reyes, 2002).
It was in this context that Pantayong Pananaw as a Filipino perspective in the social
sciences emerged. Clearly, a discourse on Philippine history was being formulated and
of the
debated upon. But the discourse was one which continued to propagate the use
American English language in dealing with indigenous concepts and traditions. It was
no different from the colonial discourse initiated by the Spaniards when they coloniz
the archipelago in 1565 and started writing Philippine history from Western perspec
let
tive using their own language, the Spanish language. The natives at that time Were
in the dark on what the discourse was all about. Fortunately, the ilustrados of the l19
century joined the colonial discourse but in order to be understood, they had to uS
colonizers language. This tradition has been continued by some present-day nb rds in
who have chosen to write Philippine history
through the use of Western standa
order to prove the Filipinos' worth. Their choice of English as the medium or mmu-

nication in their works also tells something about who their

target audience are
Pantayong Pananaw would initially emerge from the UP Department rhe
under the initiative of Dr. Zeus A. Salazar.
Although superficially translatea
 in Philippine history
we perspective, it encompasses a whole new realm of worldview towards the
historiography. lt has steered the direction of Philippine historiography
and definition ot kasaysayan with
(New History), a fusion of the ancient
Bagong Kasaysayan
tradition of history (Reyes, 2002).
rhe scientific
PANTAYONG
UNDERSTANDING
KEY CONCEPTS IN
PANANAW an interchange My
cultural discourse (or sto
In order to understand Pantayong Pananaw as a of history as a
disci-
CO
back to the development
of ideas on culture), it is important to go the ap
written history although
ancient times,there was no Su
pline in the Philippines. In known baybayin.
as
Iheir

write in the ancient system of writing H

natives knew how to as legends, songs,
epics, myths,
tradition such
in the form of oral
history back then was the concepts and
values important
w e r e able to keep
folklores, and riddles. Thus, they
leader w a s
o r female spiritual
The babaylan
to them through
the forms of oral tradition. succeeding genera-
had the duty of transmitting it to
tradition and
the keeper of oral
events
tions.
described as cyclical, meaning
they s a w important
be
Their worldview could
summer
seasons,
planting and harvesting
as a cycle,
like day and night,
and phenomena
death.
and birth and
and rainy seasons,

Historia and Kasaysayan 1565, they introduced the concept

colonized the Philippines in the
When the Spaniards e v e n t s chronologically.
They introduced
of important
of historia, or the writing of objectivity in the writing of history.
written history
and the imnportance in what has
concept of write the history of the Philippines
this in mind, they proceeded to chroniclers include
Antonio Pigafetta,
With
chronicles. Spanish
Francisco Alcina. They
wrote
become known as Spanish de Morga, and
Chirino, Antonio
Loarca, Pedro medium of
communica-

Miguel de Spanish as the

and culture using what
about Philippine history society. They propagated
in analyzing Philippine
o w n perspective divided the period
tionand their in which they
history
view of Philippine characterized by
is termed the bipartite
as the former being
and colonial periods, civiliza-
into two parts:
pre-colonial m e a n s they
considered our

"light." Simply put, this of them.

"darkness" and the latter, became civilized because
that we only
and advocated the idea culture, so to
backward a "savage
tion as efforts in civilizing to the
w a s all
about the Spaniards w a s relegated
Thus, historia tradition as history
noteworthy that o u r oral of historia,
from
it is standards
speak. Moreover, conform to the
Western
because it did n o t
s t a t u s ofmyth
which the English term "history" originated.
 the Spaniards viewed and
The following excerpt is an example of how
native customs in their chronicles. This was taken trom Miguel de Loarcas
rca's scribed
Relations of
the Filipinas Islands:
An abominable custom among the men is to bore a bole through the cen:.

placing within this opening a tin tube, they fasten a wheel like thatorgan,
to wbich

These are made of tin, and some

of a
spur, fullhalf
a
palma pound.
circumference.
in of them
more than They use twenty kinds of these wheels; but modecs weiah
s to speak of them...when they marry, they are not concerned whether their
vives are
virgins or not.
Jocano, F Landa. The Philippines at the Spanish

(Manila: MC.S. Enterprises, Inc., 1975 quest

From the 16th century to 19th century, the bipartite discourse dominated
with
the Spaniards at frst talking about our culrure among themselves and in their own
own
language (pansilangpananaw) then talking to us about it using their own language again
pangkayong pananaw). Fortunately some changes in the 19th century paved the way for

the education of some mestizos who would challenge the dominant bipartite discourse
se.
They were called ilustrados, the "enlightened ones." Because some Filipino families
mostly mestizos) became rich due to cash-crop economy in the 19th century, they were
able to send their sons to universities and colleges here and even abroad. They were able
to learn the language of the colonizers, hence they were the ones who understood the
prejudiced view of the Spaniards with regards to Philippine culture, society, and even
race. These ihustrados, led by Jose Rizal, Graciano Lopez Jaena, and Marcelo del Pilar
formulated the triparite view of Philippine history by dividing the period into three
parts-pre-colonial, colonial, and post-colonial periods (light-darkness-light). Theya
agreed that we had a high level of civilization before the Spaniards came. "The four-
ishing civilization stagnated because of colonial policies, and life would be better for the
natives if reforms would be granted and the
Philippines would become a province of
Spain. Thus, they joined the colonial discourse by talking back to the Spaniards using
Spanish as the medium of communication and colonial standards as bases in defending
Philippine culture (pangkaming pananaw).
According to Zeus Salazar, "this was the task of the Filipino thinkers of the Propa-
ganda and the Revolution. What they brought into being was a
tripartite view of Philip
pine history which, essentially, would consist of the revision of the
two-part
philosophy of history and the addition of a third epoch" (Salazar, 1983). Spanisn
This tradition
has been continued by most historians who
chose to write in English and use
in
concepts writing Philippine history. With the foreg
the 1970s, Salazar thought of proliferation of the said discoursc
formulating a Filipino
Philippine historiography, hence Pantayong Pananaw was perspective and methodolg in
born. See Figure 9.l

PANSILANG PANANAN
PANGKAYONG PANANAW
PANGKAMINGPANANAW
PANTAYONG PANANAW
 Sikolohiyang Pilipino where
like in Sikol
nd indigenous
Just

n
he
derstand the
Filipino
psyche, Pantayong concepts wereemployed
employed inin ordcr
order
Philippine history that would us
nceptsi n P h i l
Pananaw chose to focus on indigenous
fhistoria/history which
help
help understand ourselves.
indigenous
c o n c e p t

has its Western Instead of

ot using
he
in
aonceptin Pantayong P'ananaw. In biases, kasaysayan
an is used as the
key
kasaysayan,
phenomena group of people is the relevance
as
alues, andp to a or
importance of events.
aVasdysayan
Kasaysayan is "salaysay na
Vents
is
may
given emphasis instead of chronology ot
S.
Professor Mendoza, "Pantayongsaysay
. Lily Men para sa isang grupo
Pananaw
rupo ng tao." In the
the words
words of o
is a
innovation
coming out of the held of communication-based
ation-based theoretical
theoretical
ro
reterstothe normative speaking contextPhilippine historiography.
graphy. This new paradigm
within which scholars in the movement seck
help forge aa national' disco
o hel forge 'national discourse on civilization"
Pananaw, theretore, is in the internal (Mendoza, 2006). The essence of
Parnta
interconnections and connections
haracteristics, values, knowledge, wisdom, aims, traditions, behaviors and
sof a cultural whole, which is enveloped by and
S experi
expressed through the use of one
unguage. Thus, in Pantayong Pananaw, a
Filipino is talking to fellow Filipino about a
heir own experiences Filipinos, using Filipino the language of communication.
as
as

Bogong Kasaysayan
The idea of Bagong Kasaysayan is a fusion of the ancient definition of kasaysayan with
scientific tradition of historia. See Figure 9.2. Indigenous concepts and values vital
kasaysayan are studied through the use of scientihc method of historia. Thus, in
Bagong Kasaysayan, historians focus on non-traditional themes such as epidemics
women, environment, and even jokes. Written documents are not the only valid sources
onsidered, as what is propagated especially by positivists in the 19th century such as
the German historian Leopold von Ranke who argued that "no document, no historv
ihe use of primary sources, which was Ranke's contribution to the theld of historiog
phy, Is also being emphasized, bur primary sources are not conhned to documents
d0ne but to other sources as well such as artitacts, tossils, remains, language. and archi
u c . Ihe use of an indigenous perspective is also a must in Bagong Aasavavan since
l l serve as the historian's framework in analyzing historkal tacts and propagating

consciousness. Finally, the use of a national language is considered beneticial

nalist
Bagong Kasaysaya since it would help in the promotion ofa Filipino pernpective in

te
writing of history.
KASAYSAYAN
HISTORIA
BAGONG KASAYSAYAN
of past saiyy fht y y sly
&fusicor of the ancier defn
chronaiogicai
ako.PH

of everits
ysayan with the
r Mfic tradition of histofnd
DR. ZEUS A. SALAZAR AS THE PROPONENT OF
PANTAYONG PANANAW
Dr. Zeus A. Salazar,popularly known as "Bathala among students and
more and peers, is
considered the "Father of Pantayong Pananaw."
He obtained his B.A. Histo.
degree,
summa cum laude, from the University of the Philippines, Diliman and Docto.
Doctorat en
Ethnologie, with highest honors, from Sorbonne, University de Paris, France. Hc t a .
in different universities such as the University of the Philippines and De La Salle Uni
He also served as Visiting Professor abroad such as in the Ecole des Hautes Fd.
sity. udes
en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in France; Australian National University; and Univ
Jniver-
sitat Bremen in Germany. He is the co-founder of Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohi.
yang Pilipino (PSSP), Bahay Saliksikan sa Kasaysayan (BAKAS); and Asosasyon ng mga
Dalubhasa, may Hilig at Interes sa Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas (ADHIKA ng Pilipinas). He
also served as Chairperson of UP Department of History and Dean of the College of
Social Sciences and Philosophy.
Dr. Salazar also authored, edited, and translated numerous books and monographs
some of which are:
Ang Kasaysayan: Diwa at Lawak (1975)
The Ethnic Dimension: Papers on Philppine Culture, History and Paycholog
(1983)
Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas: sang Balangkas (1997)
Ang Babaylan sa Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas (1996)
Ang Kartihya ni Emilio Jacinto at ang Diwang Pilipino (1999)
Liktao at Epiko: Ang Takip ng Tapayang Libingan ng Libmanan, Camarins Sur
(2004)
Dr. Salazar is also ofhis
a
recipient of
prestigious awards as recognitiou
numerous
contributions in the academe and Philippine society, such as Chevalier dan I rdre des
Palmes Academiques from the French from PSSP
Government; Gawad ng Pagkilala fronm
Gawad ng Pagkilala from the Gawad Lope
K. Santos from UP Sentro
Linangan ng mga Wika sa Pilipinas (LWP;
nas (LWP);
GaNa1
t h e UP
ng Wikang Filipino;
College of Social Sciences and Philosophy; GawadNatatanging Alumnus tn PSS PSSP

and the Gawad BAKAS from Sikolohiyang Piliptno

Hagong Kasaysayan.
BAKAS seminar-Workshop 2011
 OANGTHS PANANAW: CRITICISMS AND
TAYONG
STRENGTHS

ather theory,
anyotheri
Pantayong
Pananaw has its own
just
mostpressing criticisms would evolve share of criticisms. Some ot
hased framework, around the idea of
advocacy of using thePantayong
with its
a langua

Pananaw being
of historical discourse in order Filipino
guage

chat the use ot the

would say that
to utilize the
Filipino
as the
language
Filipino critics perspective. Some
formation nationalist history. Otherslanguage
of
of aa nationali
is not the
only
would say that the use consideratio
tion in the
rily Tagalog-based, already
i sprimarily of Filipino
language,
philippines. P'antayong rananaw ismarginalizes
which

the rest of
the. even branded non-Tagalog languages
b y some critics. as
advocating "Tagalog Imper
alism
So faar. the most elaborate critique of
Pantayong Pananaw would come from Ramon
Guillermo's book Pook at
Paninindigan: Kritika ng Pantayong
yong Pananaw published in
uillermo divides
2009.Gu his critical evaluation of Pantayong Pananaw into two
parts:
the
aak (location/place) and
Paninindigan (principled commitment). In the first part,
points out the exclusive use of
Philippine languages
in discourse as weaknessof
he a
theory, especially the rejection of concepts that do not originate from Philip
Salazar's th
languages as automatically foreign or Western. Guillermo believes that even foreign
pine
ncepts could be appropriated within local discourse. The concept of the "great cultural
aide was also criticized in that it only focused on the achievement of cultural indepen-
divide Guillermo,
dence but did not include political and economic independence, which, for
Guillermo shows
was a more pressing issue using Marxist perspective. In the second part, to suit
theories such as Marxism could be appropriated and indigenized
rhat even foreign
local context.
be said that it was the first frame-
of Pantayong Pananaw, it can
As for the strengths
the use of Filipino as the language
work advocating a nationalist perspective primarily by in
Pananaw was not yet present
Salazar, a unified Pantayong
of discourse. According
to
instead.
Pananaw within ethnolinguistic groups
was Pantayong
ancient society. There to have
for all ethnolinguistic groups
Pananaw at present is
The of Pantayong
goal consciousness.
national identity and
basis of elite, what
Pantayong
Pananaw as
the m a s s e s and the
the gap between said
would be bridging has shown that the
Another strength history
cultural divide."
Philippine and society.
alazar coined as the "great in our culture
encroachment of
the colonizers
the one hand.

avide was made possible

by the educated (and
W e s t e r n i z e d ) on

rich and culture) on the

other
between the to Filipino
nus stratifying society rooted
in this
who remained Panan 1 a n a w , and
u n e d u c a t e d (and l'antayong
and one goal
of
dthe poor rwo is d e m a n d s of
the masses. Only
between the the
hand. Bridging the gap to give
in to
"bayan" be .
constructed

who is cxpected would the

Case is the elite nation
it
masses

and the Filpinos.

between
the elite n a t i o n a l unity
among
bybridging
g r a p h y into
the gap realization
of historiogra
the Philippine
leading to with ushering has tradition
g bayan), credited historiography

the point ot
also Philippine
P a n a n a w is from
Pantayongand
a new er that is Bagong
Kasaysayan.

history,
history
that is,
historiographv
has
political P'hilippine
on Traditional

on the powertul
focusing tocused
ally been described as
and
church
leaders.
Westerners
d
and
history has
also
of the hilippine
View ofpolitical,
litical, military, and
military,
view leaders.
Phili
Pantayong
point of
military English).
in
ooked at history from the
like esidents
presidents
and

(first
in
Spanish,
then

in
looking
ar Philippine

people in the archipetclago c o l o n i z e r ' s

languages

Filipino
perspective,

Deen written in the p e r s p e c t i v e ,

a

Panat
ananaw offered a new new
 Westerners has been the Dracs
history not from the point of view of the
as
ice for aa
long time, but from the perspective of a Filipino. For example, traditional D
history would label Gabriela Silang as the "Joan
of Arc of the Philippine ilippine
even bothering to explain Gabriela Silangs role in the struggle against the Spani without
With the author assuming that the reader already knows who Joan of Arc wac aniards,
or her to understand who Gabriela Silang was. This kind of labelling clearly nro
him
motes
the pangkaming pananaw because it uses a foreign language and Western standand..
s in

writing Philippine history.

Lastly, Pantayong Pananaw has been considered as the most advanced in terms of
theory and the most productive in terms of research output within the field of Filipina
social science perspectives. It has also been described as the most theoretically sophisti
cated expression of a Filipino social science viewpoint that offers a practical option
Western positivist social science. It is considered as a recognized perspective in Philip-
pine historiography and has made its presence felt even outside the university whereit
all began.
Pantayong Pananaw was inititated by Dr. Salazar in the 1970s in the context of
the search for aFilipino perspective in the midst of the repressive atmosphere gener-
ated by the implementation of Martial Law and the dominance of Western perspec
tive in Philippine historiography in particular, and in the Social Sciences in general. Ik
has gained following inside and outside the University of the Philippines where it al
began, as can be attested by the number of publications using the Pantayong Pananaw
as framework, as well as the number of teachers who incorporate Pantayong Pananaw in
their teaching ideology and strategy, especially in the fields of Social Studies and Philp-
pine history. Despite the criticisms, Pantayong Pananaw serves as a fresh alternative
Western positivist history where Philippine history and culture are seen from
tne yes
of the Westerners. Pantayong Pananaw offers an alternative view by tocusing and

appreciating one's culture and history using our own standards and relying
ing o
on
our
own

ino Social
judgments. At present, Pantayong Pananaw plays an important role as a Finp
Science perspective.