Lopez, Alexandra Crizel Novencido, Ma. Delfin L.

BS-Pharm 1
Lopez, Ma. Ellasanora N. Paat, Georgette S. GHIST 1
Madrid, Rovelyn L. August 13, 2019

1. Identify some of the flaws/issues/myths in the Philippine history. Do you

see a need to rewrite the history of the Philippines? Justify.

The presentation of the Philippine history is filled with the following

political and social flaws: distortion of events, the fallacy of incomplete
evidence and profuse biases. Deceptive manifestations in both written and
spoken accounts of the Philippine history, up until this point in time, are
elusively pervasive. In the past, historians have the sole control to write their
perceptions regarding an event and even forge other historians’ works to
publish prevarications and exaggerations which they could benefit from.
Political parties often stretch the truth by utilizing segmented parts of history
towards their advantage. With the need to protect their images, they destroy
evidence, bribe, and exploit resources. This hidden prejudice - that has been
lingering for decades - has been systematically disseminated through
educational institutions. In conclusion, there are no causalities that
necessitate the Filipino constituents to rewrite the history of the Philippines
but, it needs to be redressed, revised, and promulgated. The very knowledge
of some to these historical disfigurements imply a notion that truth is said to
be concealed, but real efforts enrich our understanding of things through keen
observations and criticisms.

2. John Schumacher highlighted Rizal’s insistence on the need for

Filipinos to understand their own past, explain Rizal’s line of argument
of a history from a Filipino point of view.

According to Rizal, we, Filipinos must ruminate and ascertain our past
for it shall be the principle of our decisive actions in the present and the
subsequent generations. When we have a broad grasp and understanding of
our antiquities, it indicates our unity - the same origin, experience, and
identity. We should be mindful of our history, they have collectively shaped
the fabrics of our time. From the toils of our predecessors to the comfort of our
homes today, it is in our courtesy to live up to what the people before us have
achieved and evading what they have failed to do. Thus, it is in a high sense
of importance that we should muster the comprehension of our story.

3. What were the criticisms of John Schumacher of a history written from

the nationalist point of view?

John Schumacher criticized the nationalist point of view of Pedro

Paterno and Jose Marcos. Paterno stressed all the things that he personally
 considered beneficial during the nineteenth-century. He even claimed that
Christianity existed long before the Spaniards’ colonial rule. Moreover, Marcos
forged the signature of Fr. Jose Burgos which caused misinformation. A lot of
forgeries transpired in the pre-Hispanic period which were accepted and
published into history textbooks. Schumacher then asserted that these two
attempts to make history nationalist are meaningless and insignificant.
Paterno’s and Marcos’ perspective were considered one-dimensional and
shallow. Therefore, they do not help build a sense of identity as a nation and
both just offer less guidance in resolving the challenges of the present and
building the future.

4. Compare and contrast Renato Constantino and John Schumacher’s

view on the following:

A. “People’s history”

Renato Costantino's perspective on people’s history is that individuals,

events, and institutions as particularities should be seen in their proper
perspective in the context of history as general; because, it is only by
understanding these particularities that we can fully grasp what a developing
society means. On the other hand, John Schumacher asserted that people’s
history must emphasize the Filipino people as the primary agents, not merely
just objects controlled by theocracy or unfairly treated during the colonial rule.

​B.Historian’s task in the Philippines

According to Constantino, the task of historians is to write history from

the Filipino’s perception. The central point should be the common people who
selflessly fought and died in order to attain national liberation. Scholars
divulged the lives of heroes while others were interested in contemporary
events itself. On the other hand, Schumacher highlighted the use of the
critical and analytical historical method in writing history. He explained that
historians should base on documents (memoirs, letters, literary works, books
of prayers, folk art) and discover strong and sufficient evidence to support
their conclusions. Besides, there should be apprehension with the good and
evil, creatively having a cultural interaction, to understand and experience all
aspects of the Filipino culture, and to find that religious values do not simply
lead to docility and submission, but also through ignition of passion in
resisting injustices and fighting the inhumane society.