Back in 2019, I accompanied a group of senior high school students from Ateneo de Manila to an educational trip in Seoul, South Korea. One of the places we visited was Seodaemun Prison History Hall, originally a prison built by the Japanese in 1908 to detain members of the Korean independence movement. The prison was eventually turned into a museum after liberation.
The complex is massive, and most of the exhibits showed the difficulties experienced by the prisoners. There was also a lot of information on the heroes and martyrs who suffered there. But what caught my attention was the exhibit on the 5 Eulsa Traitors. The “traitors” shown there were the five Korean ministers who signed the Japan–Korea Treaty of 1905 (known as the Eulsa Treaty), which effectively made Korea a protectorate of Japan. Korea would not see freedom again until 1945.
This particular piece caught my attention because of two things. First, the Eulsa Treaty was shown in the historical K-drama “Mr. Sunshine” (2018) which I watched a couple of weeks before the trip to Korea (the Eulsa Traitors were also portrayed there). Second, I wondered whether we—as a country—have ever placed such a definitive judgement on a person or group of people in Philippine History. To put it simply, have we ever called anyone a traitor officially?
The Complexity of Remembering
The instance I shared above shows just how complex remembering can be for a nation. Going back to the example of South Korea, while some can argue on whether it is appropriate to brand historical figures in such a manner, it is difficult not to appreciate the country’s commitment to its history, and its effort to hold people accountable. In fact, Korea’s search for collaborators continued until the 21st century, with historians and civil society groups actively lobbying to make collaborators pay for their crimes. It is not without controversy of course, and many individuals managed to escape accountability.
But the fact that the collaboration issue is still in the consciousness of many Koreans until today is a point for reflection given our own history. In contrast to South Korea, the Philippines seemed to have easily forgotten this issue. While Japanese collaboration figured heavily in the first few years after liberation, it eventually died down in 1948 when President Manual Roxas granted a general amnesty to all Filipinos who collaborated with the Japanese (exempting only those charged with espionage and common crimes). This meant that Filipinos who worked with the Japanese in government (regardless of motive), and those who engaged with them economically (again, regardless of motive) were all absolved in the name of reconciliation, unity and moving forward. Writing about this in 1999, Jesuit sociologist Fr. Jack Carroll, SJ said, “This could well have created the impression that there was no real difference between patriots and traitors, or that it was not worth the effort to sort them out.”
Fast forward to today, and the legacy of the Japanese occupation seems completely out of the country’s consciousness. Japan is an ally, and has consistently been one of our biggest sources of official developmental aid, while the Japanese collaborators have long been forgotten or forgiven. The same is true for other contentious moments in history, from the Filipino “traitors” who profited from the suffering of fellow Filipinos during the different colonial governments, to those who benefitted from the massive corruption during the Martial Law years. There doesn’t seem to be much energy and enthusiasm from the general public to deal with such issues given the more “urgent” concerns of the country. Quoting Father Caroll, SJ again, “it was not worth the effort.” This theme will play out repeatedly throughout Philippine history.
History Education in the Philippines
Determining accountability is just one of the many reasons why studying history is important for the nation. But history education in the Philippines leaves much to be desired, and has often been reduced to being the primary subject to promote “love of country” at best, or an exercise in rote memory at worst. I remember when I was still in grade school, our Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies) teachers used to make us memorize names, dates, and places. I thought that we had moved away from that after almost three decades, but seeing how history is still being taught to my kids today and the negative perception many students have towards history and Araling Panlipunan just show how little has changed.
At the root of the problem is our inability to see the value of learning history. Usually the blame is placed on the youth’s apathy, but most of the blame should be on adults—especially educators—for our failure to show that history education is an integral element in national development. As I have mentioned earlier, studying history is often reduced to some sort of duty, a task related to love of country and a vehicle to promote national pride. This limited understanding of the value of history fails to see how it comes hand-in-hand with national development, something that countries like Japan, Korea, and even China have learned long ago.
Even our national hero, Jose Rizal realized early on how integral history was to the progress of the nation. While known primarily for his novels, very few Filipinos are aware that Rizal also produced a historical work by annotating Antonio de Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (‘Events of the Philippine Islands) in 1890. In it, Rizal used the discipline of history to counter the racist narratives of Spaniards, and eventually became the first Filipino to write Philippine history from the perspective of a Filipino. In the preface to his work, Rizal wrote, “If the book succeeds to awaken your consciousness of our past… then I have not worked in vain, and with this as a basis, however small it may be, we shall be able to study the future.”
But how does history help society progress towards the future exactly? It is a question many teachers struggle to find an answer to, something I also experienced when I first started teaching in 2006. But there are many practical questions and social issues that look to history for answers or perspectives. Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was justified—officially at least—with a lengthy lecture on how Ukraine should be part of Russia based on history. China’s aggressive foreign policy is heavily influenced by its Century of Humiliation in the hands of the West. Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s presidential campaign relied heavily on the legacy of his father’s presidency. The list goes on.
History education is also essential since it trains students to have useful, practical skills needed in everyday life. What are different types of sources? How can we determine which ones are accurate? What frameworks can we use to analyze historical narratives? How do we determine which narratives are sound? What factors do we need to consider in order to judge historical events? These are all skills that are important not just to aspiring historians, but to all students. Imagine a country where students are critical thinkers and historically conscious; students who are not easily swayed by fake news and misinformation, and can easily evaluate contending arguments. Isn’t that a necessary foundation for national development?
History and the Catholic Faith
I thought it would be good to end this piece by mentioning something about how history played a key role for Filipino Catholics in recent years. As the country prepared for the 500th year of Christianity in the Philippines in 2021, questions were raised on how best to commemorate the event, and whether it is worth celebrating to begin with. Even former President Rodrigo Duterte once remarked that he would not attend any celebration related to the quincentennial since he believed that the arrival of Christianity led to centuries of suffering for the Filipino people.
It is here where history proved essential once more. As I wrote elsewhere, an accurate knowledge of Philippine history can help correct (or add nuance to) some of the common misconceptions about the Church, and lead to a more accurate evaluation of the role of Christianity in the formation of the nation. By studying its history, Filipinos may find that the Church and its clerics were more than the stereotypical Damasos and Salvis that Rizal so creatively portrayed in his novels. Many of them fought for the rights of the Filipinos, served the poor and marginalized, preserved Filipino languages and customs, spearheaded innovation, and provided the best education available to a colonized country during the time. How many of our students know this? How many Catholics are aware of this truth?
Truth-seeking is an essential part of Jesuit education and this search for truth demands the use of various tools. History is one of these essential tools. An accurate understanding of the past will help individuals analyze and understand their place in the world, and the lessons history brings may provide perspective on how to navigate the present. It will not always lead to the answers we seek, but like most disciplines, it is in the honest and truthful endeavor that the individual is able to approach the truth they seek.
Franz Jan Santos is a lecturer of the Department of History at Ateneo de Manila University. He is also currently the Student Activities Coordinator of the Ateneo de Manila Senior High School.