User:Rachellefb/sandbox

Ifugao Archaeology
Ifugao is a province located in the northern Philippines. They are best known for their elaborate rice terraces, their resistance against European colonialism, and the egalitarian tribes that inhabit this region. This paper will discuss the background on Ifugao and its archaeology, the 2000 and 200 year old hypothesis, Ifugao as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, the community archaeology surrounding Ifugao, and will conclude with the Ifugao archaeological project (IAP).

Background

Ifugao is located on the island of Luzon. Luzon’s geographical regions can be divided into highlands and lowlands. The rice terraces, which mainly define the Ifugao identity, are located in the highlands of the Cordillera Central Mountain ranges ^[1] . Due to its high altitude and the wet climate, the Ifugao practice intensive wet farming ^[2]. There was controversy regarding when the terraces were initially constructed. One theory believes that the terrace construction parallels the arrival of the Spaniards in the Philippines, who arrived about 200 years ago ^[3]. In a letter dated in 1801, there are references to accounts from 1572-1750 which suggest that these terraces were a fairly new addition to the region ^[4]. However, an earlier hypothesis raised by Barton and Beyer suggests that the rice terraces were constructed much earlier than 200 years ago, and that they actually date back to 2000 years ago ^[5].

Despite Spanish arrival, Ifugao is equally known for their resistance against Spanish Colonialism. The communities that inhabit Ifugao are: the Anyangan, Tuwali, Yattuka,Kalanguya, and Keley-i. They are apart of the Igorot people, which are hunter-gatherer groups that reside in the Philippines. The tribes that live in Ifugao are very similar, but vary slightly in language and practices. Currently archaeologists are working in Ifugao through community archaeology. One of the major archaeological projects that currently resides in Ifugao is run by Stephen Acabado, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. His project, the Ifugao Archaeological Project (IAP) is dedicated to learning about the rice terraces and Ifugao’s past and present communities.

2000 Year Old Hypothesis

During the first half of the 20th century two prominent figures in Philippine anthropology began an intensive investigation of the ethnology of the Ifuga, Barton and Beyer (Acabado et al., 2010, 140). Through them, the rice terraces became known to the outside world. Barton and Beyer were the first to develop ideas about the origins of the peoples who settled the islands; they estimated how long it would have taken to construct the terrace systems, which fill valley in the Ifugao country. Beyer, who is considered to be the “father of Filipino anthropology” was one of the first anthropologists to conducted field-based investigations of the area (Acabado et al., 2010, 140).

Barton and Beyer arrived to their conclusion through estimates of the amount of time it would have taken to construct the elaborate agricultural terrace systems that fill the valleys of Central Cordillera, for Beyer his proposed dates fit the larger issue of the peopling of the Philippines also known as the Wave of Migration Theory,(a now widely rejected theory) (Acabado et al., 2014, 15). Similarly, Barton’s contribution to the earlier model pushes the antiquity of the Ifugao people and terraces to as early as 3,000 years ago. Stating there was no way the Ifugao terreces could be built in just a few hundred years based on the current configuration and distribution (Acabado et al., 2010, 140). They both proposed that 2-3 thousand years were needed to cover the Cordilleras with rice terraces.

Wave Of Migration Theory

Beyer popularized the “wave of migration” theory, which claims that that a succession of different groups arrived in waves, with varying biological and cultural sophistication; "There was a very specific racial typology, with each wave getting lighter and lighter as the level of culture got higher and higher" (Acabado et al., 2014, 15). He stated that,

1st: to inhabit the islands were the Negritos, the dark-skinned pygmies, as Beyer stated. "They currently inhabit interior mountain ranges across the Philippine archipelago because, as Beyer postulated, of their “inferior culture."(Acabado et al., 2014, 14)

2nd: The Negritos were pushed to the mountains when the second group arrived, identified by Beyer as the Indonesian A and B. Indonesian type A were said to arrive about 3,000 to 4,000 BC and Indonesian type B arriving about 1500 to 500 BC. The descendants of the Indonesians are said to be the terrace-building tribes of northern Luzon (Ifugao)(Acabado et al., 2014, 14).

3rd: The last group said to arrive were the Malays, who arrived in 3 successive waves, with the last group appearing just before contact with Europeans. The last wave was eventually Islamized and Christianized. They settled the lowlands, thereby pushing the Indonesians and the 1st two waves of Malays to the mountains (Acabado, et al., 2014, 15).

Refuting a False Narrative

Beyer was not explicit on how he came up with the estimate which.

This idea promoted that Filipinos moved peacefully out when new groups came, and implies that nothing new was ever invented or developed in the Philippines."Filipinos were just passive observers, waiting for someone from the outside to bring in new material and cultural innovations" (Acabado, et al., 2014, 15)

For almost half a century after Barton and Beyer stated their view, no one challenged their models. (Acabado, et al., 2014, 15)."Local wisdom and nationalist sentiments would have us uphold this longstanding belief in the age of the Ifugao Rice Terraces, espoused by pioneer anthropologists of the Philippines Roy F. Barton (1919) and Henry Otley Beyer (1955)" (Acabado, et al., 2014, 15). Recent findings by the IAP (Acabado, et al., 2012), however, have provided new information driving us to rethink the 2000 year old hypothesis, primarily because of the dearth of archaeological data to support the “long history” model(Acabado, et al., 2014, 15). Archaeologists have proposed several alternatives to the Waves of Migration theory, and evidence is now pointing to a more recent history of the rice terracing traditions, a "short history" model grounded on ethnographic, ethnohistoric, archaeological, and paleoenvironmental datasets (Acabado, et al., 2014, 15).

The 200 Year Old Hypothesis

The 200 year old hypothesis came as a result of newer archaeological datasets by Ifugao Archaeological Project. The 200 year old hypothesis refutes the 2,000 year old hypothesis, originally proposed by Barton and Beyer, that has evidence pointing to a “short history” model grounded on ethnographic, ethnohistoric, archaeological, and paleoenvironmental datasets (Acabado, 2017:1). The evidence accounts for a more recent history of Cordillera rice terracing traditions which were originally thought to be 2,000 years old. This model reinforces an awareness of the technological and cultural sophistication of the people who constructed the terraces and does so without diminishing their value as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

The result of the 200 year old hypothesis was a critical re-analysis of the colonial history of Ifugao and the highland and lowland people (Acabado, 2017:3). The former narrative of the history of Ifugao proposed that Filipinos were just passive observers, waiting for someone from the outside to bring in new material and cultural innovations. It perpetuated the belief that Filipinos peacefully moved out of the way of newcomers and that nothing was ever developed or invented in the Philippines. It labelled the people as unchanging and “warriors” that fought their way to resistance giving them the stereotype of savage indigenous people.

However from the work conducted in the IAP, archaeologists proposed the alternative model based on archaeological data and sound modeling. The evidence that was found accounted for a more recent history and changed the perceptions of the highland and lowland peoples interactions and resistance of Spanish colonialism. The old model states that the highland people were isolated from lowland people and seen as “untainted” by Europeans. This created an emblematic stereotype that labelled highland people as the “original Filipino” which was seen as an ethnocentric view that denotes unchanging culture through centuries of existence (Acabado, 2017:5). Though the highland people were not directly conquered by the Spanish, the influence of the colonization of the lowland people impacted them politically and economically. and Until the IAP, this ethnocentric view about the highlands was widely held and still has racist implications throughout the Philippines today. It wasn’t until the 2012-2013 results from the IAP that indicated the introduction of wet rice varieties in the northern Philippine highlands post-date the arrival of the Spanish at ca. AD 1575 in the northern Luzon, Philippines (“The Ifugao Archaeological Project”) . This in turn was enough evidence to propose that the Cordillera rice terracing traditions were within 200 years and not 2,000 years old.

The work of the IAP proved how the highland people faced Pericolonialism but resisted Spanish Colonialism by exploring settlement patterns in Ifugao and not by “fighting to the death” as was previously proposed. Through IAP and the work conducted in 2015-2016 at the Old Kiyyangan Village, archaeologists and anthropologists worked collaboratively and dubunked the 2,000 year old hypothesis, changing the historical colonial narrative of the Ifugao people (“The Ifugao Archaeological Project”) .

Ifugao as a UNESCO World Heritage Site

The Ifugao rice terraces were placed on the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) list of World Heritage Sites in 1995, and were the first living cultural landscape to be inscribed.^[6] Under the official title of the “Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras,” Ifugao is placed in the category of cultural sites, which make up slightly more than three-fourths of the total 1073 sites. ^[7]Appropriately, the rice terraces were named a UNESCO World Heritage Site not only to preserve the astonishing physical landscape, but also the cultural traditions of the Ifugao peoples. The listing gave the terraces recognition for the blending of the cultural, physical, economic, religious, and political environments.^[6] The rice terraces were nominated and declared a World Heritage Site using three of the ten UNESCO World Heritage Centre criteria: criteria III, criteria IV, and criteria V.^[6]For criterion III, the rice terraces represent “a dramatic testimony to a community's sustainable and primarily communal system of rice production, based on harvesting water from the forest clad mountain tops and creating stone terraces and ponds, a system that has survived for two millennia."^[6]For criterion IV, the rice terraces are “a memorial to the history and labour of more than a thousand generations of small-scale farmers who, working together as a community, have created a landscape based on a delicate and sustainable use of natural resources” ^[6]. Lastly, regarding criterion V, the rice terraces embody “an outstanding example of land-use that resulted from a harmonious interaction between people and its environment which has produced a steep terraced landscape of great aesthetic beauty, now vulnerable to social and economic changes."^[6]

Connection to the 2000 Year Old Hypothesis

The classification of Ifugao as a World Heritage Site emphasizes the longstanding 2000 year hypothesis by Barton and Beyer. The recognition as a World Heritage Site highlights the idea of the longer existence of both the labor-intensive landscape and the passing down of rice-terracing traditions for at least two millennia. This “long history” model is currently being refuted by the Ifugao Archaeological Project (IAP), which has found extensive evidence proving the creation of the rice terraces was much closer to 200 years ago. Stephen Acabado argues that although the 2 millennia interpretation may not be accurate, the value of Ifugao as a World Heritage Site is not diminished. He believes the younger dating actually sheds light on the cultural and technological sophistication of the rice-terracing peoples in the Philippines.^[8]

Conservation and Restoration

The rices terraces were placed on the list of World Heritage Sites in Danger in 2001 at the Philippine government’s request.^[9] They were threatened by several factors including: neglected irrigation systems, deforestation, migration, unregulated tourism, climate change and globalization.^[9] The Philippines utilized danger listing as a way to rally national and international support of the restoration and preservation of the deteriorating landscape.^[10] Ifugao was finally removed from the list of sites in danger in 2012, recognizing the success of the Philippines’ restoration and conservation efforts.

The Hudhud Chants of the Ifugao

The Hudhud Chants of the Ifugao peoples are also protected by UNESCO. They were inscribed in 2008 onto the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity to preserve the oral tradition.^[11] The narrative chants are thought to have originated before the seventh century and are practiced during rice sowing season, harvest time, funeral wakes, and rituals.^[11] They are usually narrated by women, and specifically elderly women who hold key places in the community.^[11] There are over 200 chants and they reflect the importance of rice cultivation through the use of ancestral heroes, customary law, religious beliefs, and traditional practices.^[11]

Community Archaeology: Ifugao Archaeological Project

Since 2012, there have been efforts to practice community archaeology in the region by the Ifugao Archaeological Project (IAP). Community archaeology, sometimes also known as public archaeology, is a collaborative approach to the discipline which aims to incorporate both “descendant communities and geographically proximal neighbors” into the project.^[12] Although the term was first coined in the 1970’s^[13], community engagement was initially thought of as the concern of cultural heritage management. It was not until the 1990’s that it became more of an “ethical imperative” in archaeology.^[14]

By engaging the community, archaeologists provide the local stakeholders with some control over the research which concerns them. The collaboration between archaeologists and the community can take many forms, but essentially community archaeology entails the recognition that the stakeholders should not only be consulted, but also have a voice in the project, be allowed to participate if they so wish, and ideally derive some benefit from the work. ^[15]

At Ifugao, the IAP’s initial objective concerned the dating of the rice terraces. However, in 2011, the project consulted with Ifugao chief operating officer of the Save the Ifugao Terraces Movement (SITMo), which helped direct the IAP towards a more community-driven approach.^[16] SITMo was instrumental in linking the IAP with not only local elders and leaders, but the larger community as well, leading to an expansion of the initial objectives.For example, excavation of the Old Kiyyangan Village, a premodern highland village, was a decision directly brought about by the community’s insistence and contribution of oral history.^[17]

Because community archaeology is intended to be transparent, the IAP has encouraged the local community to participate in site excavations, provided onsite lessons, and presented preliminary findings at the end of every field season in the hopes of spurning interest and acceptance of the emerging evidence which suggest a younger dating of the terraces. This has been another important reason for engaging in community archaeology at Ifugao, as there is a real need to dismantle the inaccurate but pervasive knowledge that is rooted in the area’s “colonial archaeology” legacy and promoted as the basis of Ifugao identity. ^[18]

The project has also led to the establishment of a heritage library in a public school, which will house all of the texts that have been published about the Ifugao and possibly some artefacts as well. The IAP hopes this will inspire more interest in Ifugao archaeology, leading the stakeholders themselves to take up indigenous archaeology.^[19]

The Ifugao Archaeological Project (IAP)

The Ifugao Archaeological Project (IAP) takes place in Old Kiyyagan Village in Kiangan, Ifugao. The Old Kiyyangan Village is significant because it is said to be the first place that the Ifugaos settled (Acabado et al., 2015). Therefore, the IAP is seeking to find archaeological facts that will explain the origins of the Ifugao, instead of basing the origins on Barton and Beyer’s 200-year-old hypothesis, which has no archeological backing. The IAP has four main aims:

“1) to document highland political and economic responses to colonialism by looking at the development and expansion of the Old Kiyyangan Village;
2) to determine subsistence shifts and health and diet by examining botanical, faunal, and human skeletal remains;
3) to investigate the process of increasing social differentiation through the examination of exotic goods; and,
4) to understand how the Philippine highlands resisted Spanish colonialism by exploring settlement patterns in Ifugao” (“The Ifugao Archaeological Project,” 2016).

This project has had multiple phases since 2012. In 2012 and 2013, the project began by studying the relationship between the high and lowlands of the Old Kiyyagan Village (Acabado et al., 2015). In 2015, the project returned to complete this phase. In 2016, the IAP returned once again to study the effect of the Spanish colonialism on the highland populations in the Philippines (NSF, 2016).

This project is also significant because of its extensive application of community archaeology, which seeks to limit colonial archaeology’s interpretation of the past (Acabado et al., 2015). The IAP encourages the Ifugao community to participate in the planning, fieldwork, academic and popular publications and presentations of the project (Acabado et al., 2015). Professor Steven Acabado has said he hopes the findings from this project will allow the Ifugao educational curriculum to change, so students in the Philippines will no longer use textbooks that claim the Ifugao’s origin is based on the 2000-year-old hypothesis proposed by Barton and Beyer.

The IAP was made possible due to the Save the Ifugao Terraces Movement (SITMo), the Institute for Field Research (IFR), the National Museum of the Philippines, the University of the Philippines, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples–Ifugao, and UCLA (NSF, 2016). Many instructors have also been helpful along the IAP’s journey. The Ifugao Archaeological Project is directed by Stephen Acabado, an assistant professor of Anthropology at UCLA (NSF, 2016). Others involved, who are mentioned on the IAP’s website include:

• Mary Jane Louis Bolunia: who works in the Archaeology Division of the National Museum of the Philippines;
  
• Adam Lauer: a biological anthropologist;
  
• John A. Peterson: a landscape archaeologist from the University of Guam;
  
• Alan Farahani: a paleoethnobotanist at UCLA;
  
• Thomas Wake: a zoologist at UCLA;
  
• Peter Lape: Professor of Anthropology at the University of Washington;
  
• Grace Barretto-Tesoro: a professor at the University of the Philippines in the Archaeological Studies Program;
  
• Francisco Datar: a biological anthropologist at the University of the Philippines in the Department of Anthropology;
  
• Nam C. Kim: a southeast Asian archaeologist at the University of Wisconsin;
  
• Marlon Martin: Chief Operating Officer of the Save the Ifugao Terraces Movement, Inc. (NSF, 2016).

The wide variety of backgrounds of those involved in the IAP allow the research to be holistic, collaborative, and allows for the opportunity for unique perspectives.

While instructors are involved in this project, students also volunteer to contribute their time and knowledge through the Ifugao Archaeology Field School. The 2015 and 2016 field schools each consisted of eight undergraduate students conducting archaeological field work in the Philippines for eight weeks (NSF, 2016). Although the project was reward because it allowed these students to help the Ifugao community discover their origins, the students also learned about conducting archaeological field work. They learned to share their results through writing papers and participating in community events and activities. The field school gave participants an environment to explore archaeological issues between the relationship of agriculture and irrigation, intensification pathways, irrigation systems, and effects of colonialism on the Ifugao (NSF, 2016).
More information about this project can be found at: https://www.ifugao-archaeological-project.org/nsf-reu-site-ifugao-archaeological-project-2016.html.

The findings in the Ifugao Archaeological Project have concluded that the highland wet-rice farming of the Ifugao was a response to the Spanish’s colonization around the 1600s (Acabado et al., 2015). This would mean Barton and Beyer’s 2000-year old hypothesis was false. There were major political, economic, and agricultural shifts during this time, but they were a result of the Ifugao’s resistance to the Spanish (Acabado et al., 2015). Instead of the long-history model suggested by the 2000-year-old hypothesis, these results support a shorter-history model.