OVERVIEW OF THE CHAPTER

Cordillera evolved as a region to be the last frontier of biodiversity and one of

the strongholds of genuine values of the archipelago. The knowledge, systems,
practices, settlements, and institutions, that have been developed since time
immemorial, that may be advanced presently, and that are safeguarded for the
future, by the people who ascribed themselves as Cordillerans, are what form what
we collectively term as Cordillera Heritage. These are both a product and a process
[that] affirms and reproduces [cultural] identity of Cordillerans, considered an
important part of their character, [and is] rooted from the past, put together in
the present and conferred for the benefit of future generations. It is noteworthy
that such heritage withstands the test of time, is empirical in the contemporary
and the imminent world, and marks importance in the history of our civilization.
This chapter will then provide a synopsis for learners/readers of what to examine
throughout the study of Cordillera Heritage 101, specifically those delineated in
cultural communities, thereto discussed in the different chapters in a province/-
city- based approach.

UNIT I. EXPLORING HERITAGE AND TAWID CORDILLERA

OverviewThe unit explores what heritage means, provides a localized concept of it
and introduces Cordillera Heritage. This unit also sets the foundation and
significance of studying Cordillera Heritage 101.
LESSON 1. THE CULTURAL HERITAGE
I. IntroductionLike any word or terminology, semantic change is infinite; the
present and future meanings may change, even radically, from the original use. This
is especially true when the language used to determine something is not authentic
to a particular community. The changes become even more fluid when meanings are
attempted to be universalized as in the case of the term heritage.
Heritage is an evolving term and posits various field of discipline. It is
sometimes interchanged with the term culture, yet both terms carry unique
connotations. Meanwhile, significant heritage of a particular groups or societies
that identifies them and determines facets of their culture is what we call
cultural heritage.

II. Lesson Outcomes/ObjectivesAt the end of the lesson, the students can:1.
Characterize the similarities and differences of culture and heritage; and2.
Operationalize a definition of cultural heritage.

III. Reading ResourcesUNESCO (2014) coined the definition of cultural heritage to

be “both a product and a process, which provides societies with a wealth of
resources that are inherited from the past, created in the present and bestowed for
the benefit of future generations.”
Gleaning from the keywords from these definitions, we can characterize cultural
heritage to be:
(1) A product and a process
(2) [that] affirms and reproduces [cultural] identity
(3) of a particular society,
(4) considered an important part of its character
(5) [and is] rooted from the past,
(6) put together in the present and
(7) conferred for the benefit of future generations.
Culture is the broader concept that encompasses the shared beliefs and practices of
a group of people. On the other hand, heritage specifically refers to the tangible
and intangible aspects inherited from the past that hold cultural, historical, or
natural value. Culture is dynamic and constantly evolving while heritage represents
the enduring elements that are passed on from generation to generation.
The growing concept of heritage also created budding fields and therefore
exemplifies its transcending value. Notably, Nilson and Thorell (2018) underscored
that heritage usually represents a phenomenon within a traditional historical
discourse but have lately, more and more, come to take peripheral appearances;
often emanating from groups at the fringes of that traditional discourse as well.
The Central European University (2023), which is offering Cultural Heritage
Studies, underscores that the concept of cultural heritage developed as a result of
complex historical processes and is constantly evolving. It established that
heritage has meaning on multiple levels served best by multidisciplinary approaches
and methodologies that can be developed and used worldwide.
Cultural heritage is in the scope of inquiry of a range of humanities, social
sciences and environmental studies. The term ‘cultural heritage’ has changed
content considerably in recent decades and UNESCO takes pride in spreading the
discourses on heritage, partially owing to the instruments it has developed.
With the various definitions of UNESCO, cultural heritage is now categorized in
three general domains— (1) Tangible Heritage, (2) Intangible Heritage, and (3)
Natural Heritage.

LESSON 2. TAWID CORDILLERA

I. IntroductionThe previous section emphasized on the description, characteristics
and categories of heritage, with the emphasis that it is worthy to be conserved for
the generations after us to use. The values attached to it dictates how heritage is
ascribed.
It is quite interesting that amongst the definitions discussed in previous section
and the characteristics derived thereto, points to the Cordilleran concept of tawid
(acquired from predecessors) or maipatawid (something to pass on to scion) deriving
from the essence of her cultures as mangipaay iti biag (life-giving) and mangdur-as
iti panagbiyag (life- nurturing).
These concepts follow the paradigm that the tumawid- heir accepts the
responsibility of safeguarding the matawid- inheritance, including its attributed
value so that it continues to have banag- worth, kaipa-panan- meaning, and
kaisilbi-an- usage. Hence, heritage is not merely a matter of right but also a
matter to care for. It is a matter of responsibility.
This underpinning is rooted in the worldview that we are brought to this world not
to own anything but to become stewards of beings. As Ngohayon, S. and Fang-asan,
M.L. and Dulawan, L. (2015) underscore: “Cordillera peoples understand that the
land and resources are merely put under their care so they will pass them on to
succeeding generations. While indigenous peoples would talk about “owning” (land
and forest lots), such as in the indigenous sense of stewardship.”
Similarly, the same would be the treatment of Indigenous Cultural Communities of
the Cordilleras of tangible, intangible, and territorial properties.
II. Lesson Outcomes/ObjectivesAt the end of the lesson, the students can:
1. Define Tawid Cordillera;2. Identify different Tawid; and3. Relate self to
Cordillera.

III. Reading Resources

In terms of any possession, we had in this life, Molintas (2004) remarked that: “of
any types of use and accumulation, inheritance or tawid, is the most prized
proprietary” (paraphrasing supplemented).
The utilization and general concept of tawid vary at different levels—community
level, clan level, filial level, and individual level.
At the community level, stewardship is instituted for the whole of the community to
be responsible for conserving. For instance, the umili- community is affiliated
with a certain dap- ay, the social, religious, and political center, and is tasked
to continue the essence of such dap-ay, hence ituloy ya ipatawid nan ugali (live
and pass-on the culture).
Tawid di Ili works whereas a tinawid and/or patawid is protected, cared for, and
nurtured by the community as it is basically recognized to affect the life of the
community and the continuity of such. It extends to other mentioned levels of
tawid, being that the component of a community includes clans, families, and
individuals and vice versa.
At the clan level, a clan is bestowed the responsibility to take care of the tawid.
Other community members may benefit from the tinawid, and also partake in
safeguarding such. It is important to underscore that the community recognizes the
clan as the primary caretaker as it is also the role of the community to defend the
clan or the tawid in times of interference or encroachments.
Another level of tawid and its appended care and responsibilities, is that of
family lineage. A tawid under the care of the family may also directly impact
community activities and much more becomes the vehicle of cultural transmission and
continuity. A family tawid becomes an impetus for families to live the customs that
were set forth by the community.
Another level of tawid is when the patawid is transferred to an individual person.
Usually, these are properties that is bestowed to them by virtue of their
birthright (i.e. parcels of lot, house), during their milestones (i.e. gubbao- name
bestowed that is of identity of their ancestor and clan, beads- when a woman
marries), or feats (tattoos, where by imprinting symbols, they inherit an
identity).
What is intriguing with this level of tawid is how these are accentuated by being
rightful of such. For example, when the person has sustained deeds that are
unworthy, remorseful and disgraceful or when such individual is sickly, gloomy and
obscure, the elders may decide, after consultations (including the spirit word)
that the name of that person is changed, that may the new name springboards a new
identity as guided by the spirit of the ancestors.
The transference, for example, of leadership in the ili, is not just marked by
apprenticeship but also by acceptability as such person proved to be able to do so,
has integrity and deemed suitable by the kailiyan. Hence, even when it is decided
by the person who bestows the tawid that a selected person continues the legacy, it
is the community who enshrines such patawid to be manifested by the tumawid (as in
administering of rituals and festivities).
It is also clear that the transfer of knowledge is defined by the journey of a
person. Elders would dictate what the person may ought to know and when it is time
to bestow such knowledge. This is mostly coveted to be a mechanism that the person
has already considerable understanding and appreciation and therefore able to
interpret and rightfully use the knowledge being transferred.
In discussing these levels of tawid, we are able to glean on the following:(1) The
realities of tawid are marked by the worthiness of the tumawid;(2) In Cordillera, a
tawid is not idly constrained in the idea of being a birthright, but of the
exemplification of the values and meanings ascribed in the tinawid;(3) It is the
role of the present generation to safeguard the tinawid for future generations to
appreciate;(4) The tumawid is not the owner, in the indigenous lens, but merely a
‘caretaker’, ‘custodian’, or ‘steward’ who keep safes the tawid;(5) The tawid is
impetus to cultural manifestation and more so the continuity of such
manifestations;(6) Neglect of tawid affects filial and community relations and even
cultural continuity;(7) The tawid is generally the identity of individuals, clans,
villages and ethnolinguistic groups;(8) The levels of tawid are generally
interrelated.
It is inherent to point that amongst the characteristic of tawid, it emphasizes a
decree of identity. In the Cordillera, there are various cultural communities that
are marked by considerable features and identities. Towns and cities are also
becoming avenues of multi- culturalism. Yet, in the level of Cordillera identity,
is there something that we can really call Cordillera Heritage?
Cordillera Heritage, as a collective whole, may still be debatable in academic
parlance. The same may be the case of IPs/ICCs around the world. This is especially
that aggrupation of peoples has been historically clustered by generalization of
early historians, and essentially, by outsiders of a certain culture.
In the attempt to the delineate cultural heritage and identity, Mark Peterson
(2018) observed that “in recent times, the tendency to perceive people as
possessing identities are culturally determined rather than the outcome of
individual accomplishment.” Nilson and Thorell (2018) construed that “our cultural
heritage” contributes to the shaping of national stereotypes and regional identity
and it is a modern or post- modern reflection of the past.
It is also recently that peoples of the region self-ascribed themselves as
Cordillerans. Peoples in the region, while sharing the same history to have not
been subjugated, have not since cooperatively identified themselves under one tribe
or identity. It is imperative to be grounded of the fact that peoples in the
Cordillera Mountain range have been construed with labels. It is a myth to portray
Cordillera society as belonging to homogenous culture (Castro, 2015).
It was through outsiders’ labeling that they were generally named Igorots. In fact,
there was no widespread acceptability of such a label, especially in municipalities
and provinces outside the Kankana-ey and Ibaloi domains. Identification of as
Igorots is not always accepted (Crisologo-Mendoza, L. & Van de gaer, D., 2001). Add
to that the misnomers, prejudice and negative connotations that have been
attributed to the general term Igorot, that accounts to non- acceptability of
various ethno-linguistic groups of such identity.
People in the Cordillera identify themselves with their settlements and/or with the
institutions within such settlements. When presenting themselves to a more diverse
audience, they would instead use their ethnolinguistic affinity or the province
where their settlements are located.
In realizing that they share a common history, vulnerability, and aspiration for
inclusivity and self-governance, the idea of a Cordilleran identity progressed. The
quest for an Autonomous Region of the Cordillera strengthens the assertion of the
peoples and the acceptability of the outsiders of having a people called
Cordilleran also adds firmly to such identity. In the same manner, this collective
assertion also leads to an imprint and existence of Cordillera Heritage.
Cordillerans generally share common beliefs and ritual, but they have clear
regional variations in terms of cultural traits and social structures (Doctolero,
2021). The concrete realities of the Igorot society indicate that its common
culture is a distinct social system from the majority people’s system. Their
struggle to defend and preserve it have enhanced their awareness of a common
Cordillera [national] identity (Buendia, 1987).
There are also historical evidences that admits a common identity within and
outside the region. The writings and translations of William Henry Scott (1976,
1994) describes to us that in actuality, the cultural manifestations of people as
far as Laguna, Panay, the groups in Visayas and Mindanao have some similarities to
what are being practiced in the Cordilleras.
Scholars dedicated in Cordillera studies have also narrated in their work that
there may be a Cordillera nation as gleaned in inter-tribal affairs. This is more
so defined by the autonomy of each group, that while they are enjoying self-
governance, they subdue themselves to intertribal relations. It marks a nation
where no group is dominant over each other but are interacting and promoting co-
existence. The bodong/ pechen is an example of this.
The mutual respect for existence is also evident in inter-tribal connections as
strengthened by deeds of kinship. Intervillage solidarity are marked by
intervillage pacts. Intermarriages are promoted and when this happens, the marriage
dictates the expansion of intervillage associations.
Hence, it may really be possible that in the absence of colonial disruptions and
selective historical narratives, ethnolinguistic groups within and outside the
region would have created a nation strengthened by cultural manifestations that
govern them.
Since the idea of having a Cordillera regional identity or Cordillera nation did
not mature in the past, individual identity was ascribed by people to their
territories, not even to the ethnolinguistic groups that was labeled to them. For
instance, the people of Besao have once not ascribed themselves as i-Aplai, or i-
Besao for that matter, but as i-Payeo, i-Ambagiw, i- Padangaan. More accurately,
they ascribe themselves belonging to the description of their place, or the dap-ay
that governs such place.
During the colonization periods, there was an unconscious movement that by
defending their territories, values and beliefs, a village or a group was also
defending the whole of that described as Cordillera nation. Not allowing themselves
to be governed by the Spanish colonizers and not consenting to the assimilation of
Western philosophies whilst fostering enculturation along the way, has made them
unique from the rest of the archipelago.
More notably, the unrest around the region during the 1970s- 1980s has created a
form of response amongst villages and ethnolinguistic groups to form an identity.
Labrador (1997) calls this as Igorot ethnicity. It asserts that it is a product of
forged alliance due to threats of development aggression and perceived external
challenges. Labrador emphasized that from this process emerged "higher-order ethnic
collectivities.”
In these cases, and in many instances of disruptions, peoples of the Cordillera
guarded their worldviews, conserved their tawid and protected their identities. For
instance, the people around the Cordillera have shown a pride of regional heritage
that when a textbook depicted Igorots and other Indigenous Peoples with prejudice,
there was a wide expression of uproar. Even those who have resisted to be called
Igorots at one point, i.e. the Kalingas and the Ifugaos have stood in defense of
Igorot integrity whilst ascribing themselves as one.
There is then a growing acceptability of the labels ascribed to them, owing to the
expanded understanding of the administrative and geo-political delineation of the
government, and of course, the labels that were being ascribed to them. This was
further strengthened by common aspirations and quest for self-governance as
reflected for the common cause for Cordillera Regional Autonomy. It provides them
an option for a more neutral label but retains the integrity of their identity as a
people.
To this end, we realize that there is truly an astonishing Cordillera identity as
noticeable in the concepts discussed. It tells us that even the acceptability of a
regional identity (see Chapter II for a more detailed discussion), was of recent
memory, the ascription was actually a cognizance of the peoples’ joint assertion.
Thus, the new label becomes more reputable, and truly acceptable amongst the
people: “Cordillerans”.
As it is already an adequate ascription amongst the people and by the people, it is
inevitably the regional identity.
Henceforth, the knowledge, systems, practices, settlements, and institutions, that
have been developed since time immemorial, that may be advanced presently, and that
are safeguarded for the future, by the people who ascribed themselves as
Cordillerans, are what form what we collectively term as Cordillera Heritage. These
are both a product and a process [that] affirms and reproduces [cultural] identity
of Cordillerans, considered an important part of their character, [and is] rooted
from the past, put together in the present and conferred for the benefit of future
generations. It is noteworthy that such heritage withstands the test of time, is
empirical in the contemporary and the imminent world, and marks importance in the
history of our civilization.
Underscoring their commonalities, shared values and the unconscious victory of
defending their ways of life together, we can now conclude that indeed, there is
something we call tawid Cordillera.