James Clein T.

Tang GERPHIS
A64D 12225622
QUIZ NO. 2

1. Research and write down the THREE differences between the peopling theories of
Peter Bellwood and Wilhelm Solheim II.
Peter Bellwood, an Australian National University professor, and Wilhelm Solheim II, an
American anthropologist and the most senior practitioner of archaeology in Southeast Asia, are
among the proponents of several theories surrounding the ideas of Austronesians. The term
Austronesian contextually refers to a population group present in Southeast Asia or Oceania who
speaks, or had ancestors who spoke, one of the Austronesian languages. Apart from the
Polynesian people of Oceania, the Austronesian people include: Taiwanese Aborigines, the
majority ethnic groups of East Timor, Indonesia and Malaysia. There had been several theories
that posit the Austronesians as the origin of the Philippine population.
In the modern timeline, there are two major models/hypotheses attempting to explain
Neolithic movements of people in the Pacific and the subsequent cultural similarities among
different groups in the region: Peter Bellwood's Out-of-Taiwan (OOT) hypothesis, and Wilhelm
Solheim's Nusantao Maritime Trading and Communication Network (NMTCN). Solheim
emphasizes the cultural aspects of the Southeast Asian people, whereas Bellwood's theory places
more emphasis on the linguistic origin of people.
The main source of evidence would be the first difference between these two peopling
theories. With that being said, it thus comes as no surprise that the OOT leans towards linguistics
as the main source of evidence for explaining Neolithic movements of people in the Pacific. In
particular, the OOT very much resembles Robert Blust's model reconstructing the differentiation
of the Austronesian language family through time and space, but supplemented by data derived
from archaeology (e.g. the distribution of types of pottery, stone tools, plants, etc.). Bellwood
called all the languages formed outside Taiwan “Malayo-Polynesian”. Meanwhile, the language
developed in the Philippines and Indonesia was then termed “Western Malayo-Polynesian”.
Where Bellwood based his analysis primarily on linguistic analysis, Solheim's approach was
based on artifact findings. On the basis of a careful analysis of artifacts such as improvement of
traditional lithic chopper and chopping tools, he suggests the existence of a trade and
communication network that first spread in the Asia-Pacific region during its Neolithic age (and
that which he referred to as the Nusantao Maritime Trading and Communication Network).
The direction of migration would be the second difference between these two peopling
theories. In accordance with Peralta (2011), Peter Bellwood's Out-of-Taiwan (OOT) theory
suggests that the direction of migration was in a linear direction. The agricultural technology in
China attracted Austronesians to migrate to Taiwan. This huge population then began creating
their own languages known as the Proto-Austronesian, and due to different languages, it
escalated and later became subcultures. From the north which is Taiwan, one of these subgroups
migrated south, towards the Philippines and Indonesia to Borneo and Moluccas. Then in 1,500
B.C. other groups further migrated westward and eastward. This explains the spread of languages
as well as technologies to the other regions. It also explain the creation of unique languages
in the other regions with a common root form. These Austronesians eventually moved
beginning southwards, then eastwards and westwards. Those that arrived in the
Philippine Islands eventually stayed. On the other hand, as stated by Spawn of Anthro (2013a),
Wilhelm Solheim's Nusantao Maritime Trading and Communication Network suggests that in
5,000 B.C., East Asia, Southeast Asia and Oceania are divided into four lobes: the Eastern,
Central, Northern, and Southern Lobe. All of these lobes all point to the Central Lobe so the
direction of migration goes to the center or in one point. Thus, as in the case of Bellwood's
theory, the Austronesian languages spread eastward and westward from the area around the
Philippines. Aside from the matter of the origination of people, the difference between the two
theories is that Bellwood's theory suggests a linear expansion, while Solheim's NMTCN theory
suggests something more akin to concentric circles, all overlapping in the geographical area of
the late central lobe which includes the Philippines.
The last difference would be the reason for migration. Bellwood's theory suggests that the
migration happened because maritime traveling through the chain islands were a demographic
advantage (Spawn of Antro, 2013b). On the other hand, Solheim's theory claims that they
migrated because of the sea levels rising due to the Ice Age (Peralta, 2011).

2. Discuss a working definition of Philippine prehistory and give its significance of

studying it in the present times. Cite examples of its use today.
Our country, the Philippines, is known for its rich culture and history. However, Filipinos
often lose sight of the fact that the first period of the Philippine literary history is the longest.
Certain events from the nation’s history had forced lowland Filipinos to begin counting the years
of history from 1521, the first time written records by Westerners referred to the archipelago later
to be called “Las islas Filipinas”. As a college student, it is essential for me to understand the
authenticity of Philippine prehistory, especially its definition. In that case, I can define Philippine
prehistory as the unwritten history or the unwritten stories about our country and land. By its
very nature, Philippine prehistory is “the period of unrecorded history consisting of archeological
discoveries, way of life, geographical and geological data in order to know our country’s origin
and the roots of the original Filipino”. As such, it is important for Filipinos to learn about their
heritage so as to establish their own national identity. The prehistory of the Philippines covers the
events prior to the written history of what is now the Philippines. Nonetheless, Philippine
prehistory relies on theories since no one lived to recount how the islands emerged and how the
people in the islands began or even how they got there.
Every succeeding generation has received oral literature about prehistory from our
ancestors through word-of-mouth. These oral literature consist of myths, folk epics, songs,
chants, and legends, a few among others. In relation to what Cabrera (2016) said, events,
contemporary beliefs, surroundings, experiences of people and the like are among the subjects of
oral literature before. These elements weren't recorded or documented, but they were left behind
and picked up by experts like archaeologists to read and study. The conclusions drawn may
occasionally be tainted by bias, human mistake, or creative thinking (Peralta, n.d.). Hence, it is
important to rediscover this heritage and rebuild our concept of our nation. Citizens like us
should make an effort in educating ourselves in relation to real history.
Studying Philippine prehistory urges Filipinos to not merely accept the information that is
given to them. But rather, question and analyze the said information considering that the world is
evolving and that times are changing. Prehistory can also lead us to question some of the
things we learned in school. As every artifact is found and analyzed, we can formulate,
revise and debunk theories. For instance, prehistory helps Filipinos discover what their strengths
and weaknesses are as individuals through the upbringing and culture that they are accustomed
to. Once they recognize these, they may be able to determine what they can do together as a
people. Moreover, studying prehistory of the Philippines allows us to gain valuable perspectives
on the problems of our modern society. Many problems, features, and characteristics of modern
Philippine society can be traced back to historical questions on our colonial past, as well as our
pre-colonial culture. Our export-oriented economy, for example, can be traced back to the ending
of the galleon trade and the subsequent liberalization and tying of the country to the world
market, coupled with the lack of industrial advancement in the islands. This and other lessons
can be uncovered by digging deep into the country’s past.
Studying Philippine prehistory could be used today to boost our country's tourism,
especially when everything will be back tonormal after this pandemic. This will help attract more
tourists to our country who are interested in history and are fond of going into museums that
preserve artifacts and other pieces of evidenceof the past. A boost in a country's tourism equals
economic growth which our country badlyneeds now because of the pandemic's negative impact
on our economy. The prehistory of thePhilippines could be of a little help in boosting it again
through tourism
Last but not least, I firmly believe that the significance of Philippine prehistory lies
within the roots of Filipino identity and the origin of our national heritage which includes our
customs, values, beliefs, and even our language. Likewise, it can offer historical explanations for
modern issues about our identity and why we resemble the Malayan countries. In accordance
with Cabrera (2016), diving into our oral past will provide us with appropriate and sufficient
knowledge that the country's wealth was actually its indigenous literature and in this phase of
literary development, it was almost as if every member of a tribe was a "singer or storyteller" and
every tribe has its own abundance of literature. In addition, given the enormous number of social
problems we face now, we can learn from how precolonial society functioned. Women back then
were treated equally to men in terms of importance, respect, and status. Poverty didn't exist back
then either since everyone knew how to fish, cultivate, and make the best use of the various
agricultural and natural resources we have today.
 3. Write a short reflection (500 words or more) of our prehistoric heritage based on
any of the videos viewed during the lesson.
In order to have a better understanding and deeper perspective of the prehistoric heritage
of the Philippines, our class viewed several videos for class discussions. I can confidently say
that among all the videos I’ve watched, the National Treasure videos (Parts 1-4) had the most
impact on me as watching the video gave me a realization that we have a profound volume of
culture and heritage in our country that is not realized by most of us citizens of the country,
Filipinos. I am fully aware that the Philippines is actually a rich historical country and it is
disheartening that this idea is not acknowledged by many especially by the younger generation as
they are not aware of it.
The videos covered a wide range of topics when it comes to our history and national
treasures. Our language and writing system, which were changed as a result of American and
Spanish colonialism, were two of the topics that really caught my attention. Back in the 16th
century, Filipinos used the Alibata as their writing system, however, this was greatly altered
during the colonization of the Spaniards as the Alibata became heavily influenced by them.
Furthermore, it is common knowledge that English and Filipino are the two most used languages
in our country and the main reason for this is the colonization of the Americans years after the
Spaniards. What frustrates me is that most Filipinos prefer to speak in English and teach their
kids how to speak in English rather than in Filipino which results in most people having English
as their mother tongue. It saddens me that our own Filipino language has not been able to
completely evolve into a single, original, and complete mother tongue that will be passed down
through the Filipino people's community
Before any nation colonized us, our people had their own civilization. Not only through
our written and spoken languages, such as the Alibata, but also through our religious beliefs. The
video also explained the culture of the Filipinos, before getting colonized, like using meaningful
jars to store the bones of the deceased. It is the secondary burial jar excavated from a Neolithic
burial site in the Manunggulcave of the Tabon Caves at Lipuun Point in Palawan, Philippines.
This, I suppose, is a reflection of the previous religious convictions of our ancestors. There were
rumors circulating in our country that, apparently, souls go to the next life, aboard boats, and
pass through the rivers and seas.
Moving on, I just can’t help but think that if only our culture and heritage had been
protected in the past, and if only we had not been influenced by our invaders who harmed our
culture, it would have developed so beautifully now and be recognized by all Filipinos, as I
believe it is something of which we should be proud. Today, there are still some people who do
not show importance and value to our culture. Merely based on the present events today, our
culture has been withering for quite some time and is continuing to do so which is also because
we, the Filipinos ignore it. Even the museums that house our antiquities and other historical
national treasures do not receive enough attention or recognition for us to be able to upgrade our
facilities. A great comparison to point out is how Japan preserves its culture. It's amusing to see
how Japan supports both tangible and intangible cultural heritages in an effort to maintain its
culture and traditions. Their museums are not only given attention by the tourists that visit their
country but even by their locals as well. It only demonstrates how highly their nation's citizens
regard their culture and how little we regard ours. I suppose if we cherished and admired our
tradition more, we would have advanced as a nation. I sincerely hope that we, Filipino citizens,
will learn to carefully conserve the artifacts that represent our culture.

References:

Peralta, J. (n.d.). GLANCES: Prehistory of the Philippines. Retrieved from

https://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/culture-profile/prehistory-of-the-philippines/

Jocano, F. (1967). The Beginnings Filipino Society and Culture. Retrieved from
Philippine Studies, 15(1), 9-40.: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42720172

Cabrera, E. (2016). Philippine Literature during Pre-Colonial Period. Retrieved from:

https://esielcabrera.wordpress.com/2016/02/26/philippine-literature-during-pre-colonial-period/

Peralta, J. (2011). In Focus: The Austronesian Expansion- a Reaction to "Paths of

Origin". Retrieved from: https://ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/in-focus
the-austronesian-expansion-a-reaction-to-paths-of-origin/

Spawn of Anthro. (2013a). On Solheim's Nusantao — Filipino Origins. Retrieved from

https://spawnofanthro.wordpress.com

Spawn of Anthro. (2013b). Out-of-Taiwan (On the Spread of Austronesians in Southeast

Asia). Retrieved from
https://spawnofanthro.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/out-of-taiwan-on-the-spread-of-austronesians-i
n-southeast-asia/

(2018) Recovering the National Memory: The Quest for a Pre-Colonial Filipino Past.
[Video] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/webcast-8451/