Decolonising history: How marginalised communities reclaim narrative sovereignty amid extractive academic frameworks

Indigenous knowledge systems in the Philippines, such as the *baybayin* script or the *hudhud* chants of the Ifugao, have preserved historical memory long before colonial anthropology emerged. These traditions operate as living archives, where knowledge is transmitted through ritual and performance rather than institutionalised texts. Yet mainstream decolonial discourse often treats Indigenous epistemologies as supplementary rather than foundational to historical restitution.

The Philippines' colonial historiography was shaped by 19th-century racial hierarchies, where American anthropologists like H. Otley Beyer constructed 'scientific' justifications for Indigenous inferiority. This framework mirrored global patterns, from the British 'civilising mission' to French *mission civilisatrice*, where anthropology served as a tool of empire. The 'shift' today is a delayed reckoning with these legacies, not a novel phenomenon.

In Mexico, the *tlacuilo* (Aztec scribes) resisted Spanish erasure by embedding Indigenous histories in codices, a strategy echoed by contemporary Zapatista autonomous schools. The Yoruba tradition of *ese Ifá* (divination poetry) preserves genealogical and historical knowledge through metaphor, challenging linear Western historiography. These parallels reveal that 'community power' in defining history is not unique to the Philippines but part of a global pattern of Indigenous epistemological resilience.

Anthropology's shift from 'salvage ethnography' to participatory methods reflects methodological progress, but it often lacks rigorous frameworks for redistributing epistemic authority. Studies on Indigenous knowledge systems (e.g., the *Ifugao Rice Terraces* as a UNESCO site) show how Western metrics of 'authenticity' still gatekeep what counts as valid history. Decolonial science requires co-authorship models where Indigenous scholars lead research design and interpretation.

Artistic traditions like the *kundiman* (Filipino love songs) and *balagtasan* (poetic debates) have historically encoded subversive histories, using metaphor to evade colonial censorship. The *t'nalak* weaving of the T'boli people weaves cosmological narratives into fabric, making history tactile and communal. These forms challenge the Western separation of art from 'objective' history, revealing history as a living, embodied practice.

A decolonial future requires dismantling the 'knowledge extractivism' model, where Western institutions mine Indigenous knowledge for prestige without reciprocity. Scenario planning could involve Indigenous-led digital archives (e.g., the *Talaandig* community's use of VR to document oral histories) that bypass academic gatekeeping. Long-term, this could redefine 'universal' history as a polyphonic tapestry rather than a single authoritative narrative.

Indigenous scholars like Zeus Salazar and Grace Barretto-Tesoro have critiqued anthropology's extractive practices, yet their work is sidelined in global decolonial discourse. Women historians in the Philippines, such as the *Babaylan* tradition-bearers, have preserved matrilineal histories that colonial frameworks erased. The framing of 'community power' often centers male academics, ignoring how Indigenous women's knowledge systems (e.g., *ligligan* rituals) are foundational to historical memory.

The trickster here is *Anansi*, the West African spider-god, who outwits oppressive storytellers by weaving their own narratives into the fabric of power. Like Anansi, the 'shift' in defining history is often a performance where institutions claim to 'give back' authority while retaining control—much like a museum 'returning' a stolen artifact but only to loan it back. The absurdity lies in how 'decolonisation' becomes a brand, while the mechanisms of epistemic extraction remain intact.