"The Past of the Future"
“The past has been there all along, reminding us: This time--maybe, hopefully, against all odds,
we will get it right.”
As the quote from Leslie T. Chang says, the past is there to remind us to get our future right. Past.
One word that has a great impact on our future, could either create it or break it. But one thing is for
certain, it is there for us to understand it and learn from it.
In the Philippines, “past” or “history” is equivalent to the Tagalog word “kasaysayan”. It comes
from saysay which means both “to relate in detail, to explain,” and “value, worth, significance.” Although
history could be considered as the written narrative of the past, it is also more than that. It's a key to
historical realities that was needed to grasp the present so that the future may be better planned and thus
controlled.
At the time of the Spanish conquest, the Filipinos had an indigenous view of history that was
cyclical and concerned with history as a story pertinent (may kasaysayan) to a certain community. The
Spaniards carried with them a two-part historical consciousness as well as an archipelagic perspective.
“Felipinas”, a name from the Spanish King, Felipe Segundo, given to the island where its natives were
civilized because of the Spanish mission to bring light to it through Christianization and civilization. It
does not only think of native Filipinos as pagans but also savages. Thus, portraying the Philippine history
as merely that of “Spain in the Philippines.”
In response to the Spaniards' earlier two-part, or bipartite, historia of the islands, Rizal suggested a
three-part, or tripartite, historical narrative; in general, the archipelago before, during, and (most likely)
after the Spaniards came. The messages and meanings conveyed into these parts were completely
different than that of the Spaniards’. If the Spaniards used a darkness-lightness pattern in their bipartite
history of the Philippines, Rizal reactively implied a lightness-darkness-lightness tripartite framework of
history.
Many claims were made about the greatness of the civilization on the islands before the arrival of
the Spaniards; that is, the greatness that was ushered in by the colonization of Spain. Rizal believed that
the Spaniards' arrival, and their egotistical motives, destroyed the great potential of the Filipinos to
develop on their own; their system of writing, oldest traditions, and even their being amiable. Though
Rizal considered Spain as a motherland, it was its representatives who ruined its image and brought
darkness to it. It was a pity that the inhabitants learned and adopted the darkness that was brought to
them. However, the Filipinos were deemed to fight for what they thought was right for them; and this was
predicted as the beginning of the new epoch for the land and light-darkness-light tripartite view of Rizal
was fulfilled.
He was not alone. There were the two known greatest propagandists in Philippine history who
thought the same way as him. These were Marcelo H. del Pilar (1850-1896) and Graciano Lopez Jaena
(1856-1896). They were also guided by the same framework of the Philippine history; the light-darkness
light perspective. They lacked Rizal's extreme and consistent views on the same concept, but they
generally thought of and conceived the Philippines' history in the same periodization as the former; that
is, the archipelago's history is divided into distinct pre-colonial, colonial, and post-colonial periods.
Del Pilar thought that the archipelago was naturally a rich land of natural resources and has its
inhabitants who were full of potential for growth and learning, but it was not yet comparable to the
civilization of Europe at that time. Through its newfound connection with Spain, it was given a chance to
develop this potential to its utmost potential.
Through Spain’s representative at that time, Legazpi’s, and the country’s representative Sikatuna’s
pacto de sangre or blood compact during the 16th century, the Philippines turned into an adopted daughter
of Spain who promised development through learning. But it seemed that Spain’s representatives were not
trustworthy enough to keep that promise, thus bringing the daughter Philippines chaos in countless
aspects. The second period of the archipelago's history began with the positive intentions of Spain which
was slowly transformed into something of its opposite that brought darkness to the land and its people.
This was, according to him, the perfect time to study ourselves for us to decide if we still want to
continue being in this state of oppressive distress. The decision had to come from the Filipinos
themselves if they want to free themselves from the injustices that they are facing and build the nation
that they were expecting through either revolution or liberal reforms.
The post-colonial period, for Del Pilar when the promised potential of the archipelago would be
fulfilled with the honest assistance of Spain. His was, therefore, still the assimilationist approach to the
foreseen betterment of his birthland; and, while he could easily comprehend the actual event as well as the
resulting benefits of a bloody revolution, he would prefer liberal reforms so that peaceful actions could be
carried out to resolve the entire complex situation.
Jaena, on the other hand, was convinced that, though relatively primitive, before the coming of
the Spaniards, the Philippines had a degree of civilization that was comparable to those of the older
civilizations of the world. In his perspective, the first historical period of the country was a period of
relative lightness. It was a civilization similar to China's and Japan's but was never given a chance to
further develop itself because of the arrival of the first colonizers, the Spaniards. It ended with the
monastic supremacy over the archipelago which turned the light into a period of darkness. Similar to del
Pilar's thoughts, the friar was, therefore, the cause of the problematic situations in the Philippines. In
addition, to make his point even clearer, he developed the character of Fray Botod which was probably a
typical friar in the country in all of his ugliest, almost animalistic nature. The most effective way of
resolving the situation was to effectively end the monastic rule.
In Jaena's opinion, the departure of the friars from the Philippines would begin a new era for its
people. In the years leading up to his death, Jaena had given up on the Philippines' dream of integration
and was contemplating the lines of a bloody revolution for the archipelago to achieve its goal of
progressive development. Nonetheless, Jaena's concept of history, like that of his colleagues Rizal and
Del Pilar, was clearly tripartite; that is, the liwanag-dilim-liwanag history of the Philippines.
The history of the country was divided into three distinct periods: periods of lightness and
primitive prosperity; period of darkness caused by friar sovereignty; and the period of lightness and
progressive prosperity. Indeed, one of the most important legacies of the Propaganda Movement, which
these three men symbolized and embodied, was the tripartite view of Philippine history. Understanding
and reformulating our national history will surely play a crucial role in the development of our country’s
future. Additionally, our history implies that no matter how hard we are pushed to stay in the dark, we
must not focus on lingering in that darkness for too long, instead, focus on bringing back the light again.