How Did Zeus Salazar Differentiate Our Indigenous Perception Of What History Or Kaaysayan Is?

2. On Historiography
a. How did Zeus Salazar differentiate the Western definition and our “indigenous” perception of what history or kasaysayan is?

ANSWER: “Magkaiba ang kasaysayan, na binigyang-diin ng saysay, at historya, na nakatuon naman sa pagsisisyasat.”

Salazar defined “history” in Tagalog as different from the Western definition, which referred to knowledge, to the search of information or to what happened in the past. He defined ‘kasaysayan’ in our “indigenous” perception. It came from the root word ‘saysay’ which means “to relate in detail, to explain” and “value, worth, significance.” Whereas kasaysayan is also defined as “explanation,” “significance,” or “relevance.”[ ]

The definition of history is all about the knowledge in
They intensified the conversion of the Filipino elite to Western cultural norms did not necessarily identify them with the true Westerners, the really “civilized ones,” for they still felt themselves to be of the native earth. Their increasing number excluded their easy acceptance into the “civilizing” Spanish elite, not only because of the weight of the elite mentality that derived from the bipartite historical ideology. Feeling themselves natives while subconsciously wanting to be (and sometimes being) Spaniards, the hispanized youth of the second half of the nineteenth century where the ones who could really react to the racial and cultural calumny behind the tripartite view of Philippine history: the Indios basically barbarian in nature (even when dressed as a Spaniard and speaking Spanish), his incapacity for intellectual and artistic pursuits, his ingratitude to the Spanish “motherland” and the Mother Church. The archipelago was even then considered simply as the stage for the action of Spain, so that the historical consciousness that viewed and integrated as such action was, in the end, one which saw Philippine history as merely that of “Spain in the Philippines.” It was a conscious that could not help but consider the Indio as the object of the historical action by the Spaniard who, in his
The evidences of commerce and trade in the Philippines with China, India, and Japan, social status, alphabet, laws, musical instruments, boat, literature, religion, farming, etc. are justifiable that people in the Philippines before the arrival of Spaniards are not barbaric and uncivilized. The Filipinos that time were less backward compared to the Western countries. [ ][ ]

e. OPINION SECTION
How did the book change the way you understand Philippine prehistory and the ways of life of its pre-colonial population?

If you look into the pre-colonial past of the Philippines and compare it to the current situation of the country, which aspects of the old culture do you wish to be retained and still be practiced until the present?

ANSWER: Basically, the book changed my impression of who really our ancestors are before the coming of the Spaniards in the Philippines. We only taught in elementary and high school that there are different ethnic groups in the Philippines. We were never taught about the practices or rites of every region. Like in the Visayas, architecture, burial, tattooing, myths, deities, etc. It really changed my mind about the prehistory of the Philippines because there are many practices have been preserved until like the weaving, building houses, farming,