What do you think?
Rate this book
The Creatures of Philippine Lower Mythology
IMAGINARY CREATURES depicted in a people's lower mythology are one of the most important phenomena in their belief systems. This is because the common folk in particular must strive to maintain harmonious relations with these creatures, a continuous process that permeates many aspects of their everyday lives and requires the intercession of a special person in the community who acts as the medium of communication between them.The subject of Maximo D. Ramos's work is the creatures of Philippine lower mythology, as this level of folklore is called. In undertaking this study, Dr. Ramos directed his efforts to two principal (1) making a taxonomic classification of all the beings which in his opinion fall within the framework of the problem as found in Philippine folk beliefs, and (2) correlating the implications of these beliefs, in terms of these classifications, to education, particularly on the elementary level.The taxonomic classification is intended to help clear up the confusion that attended earlier studies of these creatures. This is indeed the first attempt to systematize the identities of these Philippine mythological beings for the benefit of folklore scholarship. More specifically, Ramos "Where names, traits, and functions appear to have become confused ... through the process of transfer that constantly occurs in traditional lore, it was thought fruitful to point these out and then attempt to account for them".In spite of the very extensive Christianization of the Filipinos—particularly the lowlanders—these mythical entities still persist in their traditional belief systems, hence the student of folk traditions cannot ignore them if he is to achieve greater relevance in his studies. Little by little the perspective from which these creatures have been traditionally viewed is bound to change until they are accepted as part of our cultural heritage. This change is bringing about an understanding of these creatures' function in our society.The present work is primarily taxonomic in nature but it sheds light into many of the dark corners of Philippine folklore studies and brings to the reader a fuller understanding of the most maligned inhabitants of the Philippine other- world. Herein lies the major contribution of Dr. Ramos—a basic recognition and a deeper insight into the cultural heritage of the Filipino.
424 pages, Unknown Binding
Published January 1, 1990
33 people are currently reading
853 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
January 27, 2022
It's a little difficult for me to rate this book, because on one hand, I recognize that the author really pioneered the scholarly work on Philippine mythology and folklore, giving this space some legitimacy so that they can be studied seriously. But at the same time, there were a few things about the delivery of information in this book that I wasn't keen on.
Although this book was published in the 90's, much of the content was based on the author's dissertation from the 1960s. In the introduction, the writer admits that because his was the first attempt to write about Filipino folklore in a scholarly way, he was encouraged by his American professor to use European folkloric creatures as his template. I sympathize with the writer's situation, and ultimately, his pioneering of this field did more good than harm. (After all, when I was growing up in the 90's, I was immersed in a culture abound with stories of aswang, nuno, tiyanak, etc. It seemed like this wasn't the case when the writer was young.) But I do think there were some unfortunate effects of having used this methodology.
First, by using a European template to categorize Filipino folklore creatures, the writer subordinates the latter to the former. Anyone who wants to use this book to find out more information about Filipino folklore creatures *must* first be familiar with European folklore creatures. Granted, fairies and giants and vampires are pretty ubiquitous in mainstream culture these days, but why make it a dependency? Secondly, it makes categorization of complex Filipino creatures very tedious. For example, information about the aswang was split into three different categories based on its vampire, werewolf, or witch aspect.
I also had a difficult time appreciating the second half of the book. The first catalogues the different characteristics of folkloric creatures, but the second tries to address social issues that are either improved or worsened by people's beliefs in these creatures. On one hand, the author feels that integrating Filipino mythological/folkloric creature better in our arts and media will enrich our cultural heritage (which I agree with). On the other, the author warns of how beliefs in these creatures hinder scientific progress. I never really felt like the author found a good balance in advocating for one, and warning against the other. The second half of the book feels like this weird tug-of-war.
Even when he was advocating to use these creatures to enrich Filipino art, writing, and music, I found it strange that he was always using Western art as comparison. For example, consider this passage:
Thinking Filipinos deplore the fact that their people are a nation of performers but not of composers. Could this creative aridity be due to the sad fact that the deep roots of Philippine pre-Hispanic culture have not been explored and the glare of recent cultural importations has blinded the people to their cultural heritage as subjects for their arts?
I completely agree with the sentiment of this passage. I do find it odd that Filipinos love to tout our singers' vocal prowess, but when it comes to the global music stage, Filipino music is hardly considered innovative, but rather, derivative. However, the sentence that followed this was head-scratching:
Filipinos have written competent kundiman, but no conerti and hardly any symphony.
Okay, but why would the author want Filipinos to copy the musical styles of European countries, when he had just criticized our lack of propensity for creating something truly ours? In one sentence, he had negated the call for pre-Hispanic cultural resurgence by calling instead for concertis and symphonies. This is a contradiction, and this is the type of mindset that was prominent throughout the whole book. The author consistently undermines his advocacy for precolonial culture, by insisting that Filipinos still copy their European counterparts.
Now onto the sections where the author criticizes the beliefs in mythological creatures as hindrances to scientific progress. This is where my inner data scientist died a little. The author tries to shoehorn the belief in lower mythology into every aspect of Filipino culture that is just slightly different from American culture. Anything that can be deemed as backward or inferior was blamed into the beliefs in these mythological creatures. People can't swim? Oh, it's because they're scared of being lured by mermaids! Farmers don't practice new farming styles? Oh, it's because they don't want to disturb the fairies in the trees and the nuno under the ground! Filipinos are more community-oriented instead of individualistic? It's because they don't want to accidentally offend a witch in disguise among them!
I can appreciate that the author used anecdotes from locals, and especially from rural regions, to compile folkloric information. I think this is very important for a culture that had a very rich oral tradition when it comes to storytelling. What I don't appreciate is how he used these anecdotal evidence to come up with sweeping, generalizations about the Filipino people.
(I found it really odd that when the author criticized faith healers, he did not include cases in which the Catholic faith also spurred Filipinos into seeking miraculous cures. Was this because the author didn't believe that Christianity cannot be at odds with scientific medicine?)
There were also stereotypes about Filipino sentiments that I found untrue. I don't know if it's because I'm part of a different generation now and that perhaps these sentiments are now outdated. But there was a section about how Filipinos didn't like marrying outside their ethnicity, because they believed people of other races might be an aswang. I was really shocked by this assumption. I had never heard of any indication that aswang were more likely to be associated with people of American or Spanish descent. And I don't know where the author got the idea that Filipinos don't like marrying outside their own race, anyway. From what I know, even during colonial times, it has always been touted as more advantageous and beneficial to marry a Westerner.
Anyway, I would recommend reading this book for the information contained in the first half. But I don't think I got anything really meaningful out of the second half. Maybe I got some insights on the biases and prejudices from fifty years ago, but that's about it.
Although this book was published in the 90's, much of the content was based on the author's dissertation from the 1960s. In the introduction, the writer admits that because his was the first attempt to write about Filipino folklore in a scholarly way, he was encouraged by his American professor to use European folkloric creatures as his template. I sympathize with the writer's situation, and ultimately, his pioneering of this field did more good than harm. (After all, when I was growing up in the 90's, I was immersed in a culture abound with stories of aswang, nuno, tiyanak, etc. It seemed like this wasn't the case when the writer was young.) But I do think there were some unfortunate effects of having used this methodology.
First, by using a European template to categorize Filipino folklore creatures, the writer subordinates the latter to the former. Anyone who wants to use this book to find out more information about Filipino folklore creatures *must* first be familiar with European folklore creatures. Granted, fairies and giants and vampires are pretty ubiquitous in mainstream culture these days, but why make it a dependency? Secondly, it makes categorization of complex Filipino creatures very tedious. For example, information about the aswang was split into three different categories based on its vampire, werewolf, or witch aspect.
I also had a difficult time appreciating the second half of the book. The first catalogues the different characteristics of folkloric creatures, but the second tries to address social issues that are either improved or worsened by people's beliefs in these creatures. On one hand, the author feels that integrating Filipino mythological/folkloric creature better in our arts and media will enrich our cultural heritage (which I agree with). On the other, the author warns of how beliefs in these creatures hinder scientific progress. I never really felt like the author found a good balance in advocating for one, and warning against the other. The second half of the book feels like this weird tug-of-war.
Even when he was advocating to use these creatures to enrich Filipino art, writing, and music, I found it strange that he was always using Western art as comparison. For example, consider this passage:
Thinking Filipinos deplore the fact that their people are a nation of performers but not of composers. Could this creative aridity be due to the sad fact that the deep roots of Philippine pre-Hispanic culture have not been explored and the glare of recent cultural importations has blinded the people to their cultural heritage as subjects for their arts?
I completely agree with the sentiment of this passage. I do find it odd that Filipinos love to tout our singers' vocal prowess, but when it comes to the global music stage, Filipino music is hardly considered innovative, but rather, derivative. However, the sentence that followed this was head-scratching:
Filipinos have written competent kundiman, but no conerti and hardly any symphony.
Okay, but why would the author want Filipinos to copy the musical styles of European countries, when he had just criticized our lack of propensity for creating something truly ours? In one sentence, he had negated the call for pre-Hispanic cultural resurgence by calling instead for concertis and symphonies. This is a contradiction, and this is the type of mindset that was prominent throughout the whole book. The author consistently undermines his advocacy for precolonial culture, by insisting that Filipinos still copy their European counterparts.
Now onto the sections where the author criticizes the beliefs in mythological creatures as hindrances to scientific progress. This is where my inner data scientist died a little. The author tries to shoehorn the belief in lower mythology into every aspect of Filipino culture that is just slightly different from American culture. Anything that can be deemed as backward or inferior was blamed into the beliefs in these mythological creatures. People can't swim? Oh, it's because they're scared of being lured by mermaids! Farmers don't practice new farming styles? Oh, it's because they don't want to disturb the fairies in the trees and the nuno under the ground! Filipinos are more community-oriented instead of individualistic? It's because they don't want to accidentally offend a witch in disguise among them!
I can appreciate that the author used anecdotes from locals, and especially from rural regions, to compile folkloric information. I think this is very important for a culture that had a very rich oral tradition when it comes to storytelling. What I don't appreciate is how he used these anecdotal evidence to come up with sweeping, generalizations about the Filipino people.
(I found it really odd that when the author criticized faith healers, he did not include cases in which the Catholic faith also spurred Filipinos into seeking miraculous cures. Was this because the author didn't believe that Christianity cannot be at odds with scientific medicine?)
There were also stereotypes about Filipino sentiments that I found untrue. I don't know if it's because I'm part of a different generation now and that perhaps these sentiments are now outdated. But there was a section about how Filipinos didn't like marrying outside their ethnicity, because they believed people of other races might be an aswang. I was really shocked by this assumption. I had never heard of any indication that aswang were more likely to be associated with people of American or Spanish descent. And I don't know where the author got the idea that Filipinos don't like marrying outside their own race, anyway. From what I know, even during colonial times, it has always been touted as more advantageous and beneficial to marry a Westerner.
Anyway, I would recommend reading this book for the information contained in the first half. But I don't think I got anything really meaningful out of the second half. Maybe I got some insights on the biases and prejudices from fifty years ago, but that's about it.
January 3, 2020
I had this on my “to read” list for 5 years at least, it was about time that I read it. And I basically devour folklore books anyway, so I figured that I would be done with this quickly.
By that I seemed to have been more focused and clearer with my goals than the author of this. Sure, it had interesting information, but I really wondered why the author decided to make this book like this. Early on I asked myself why he did choose these European derived categories if he doesn't want to. Why not make categories of his own?
And if he wants to define dwarves as basically ill-favored little men who live on or under the ground, in crags, and in hills and mountains and Elves, on the other hand, are chiefly tree-dwelling creatures and are "handsomer and better made than men, although smaller,” let him.
I also think that in European folklore the transformation of a werewolf via ointment is the more common transformation and not via wolf pelt as this here states.
Now when he starts with his chapters, in a structure based on European categories, he has some interesting information but its structure us not good. The following one on dragons (which also mentions crocodile veneration among the Filipinos of old) has its shortcomings as well but is at least better structured and more cohesive. The one on demons seemed like he just threw in what he could find.
And what definition of “giant” is he using? According to him “giants may either be human, animal, or bird in form,” and the Philippine giants have human shape, with at least one of them, the bannog (banog, ban-og) of Northern Luzon, is in the shape of a bird, and another, the ikugan, has a simian form. But, like I said, then what is your definition of "giant?" This is a common problem here, the sometimes-inconsistent definitions. Several of the demons or ogres in this could therefore be giants as well.
And what is with this odd structure of the text? It cannot be due to the fact that this is a study (which the book should have stated on the title in my mind).
And why is a story about a golden centipede at the bottom of the water in the section on mermaids? Did it belong to a mermaid? Was it classified as a mermaid?
The basic structure of the chapters is fine but inside he is a bit chaotic. It is interesting to read about these ogres with their differing features or how Garuda turned from a deity to a shapeshifting ogre on it way to the Philippines, but it would be easier to read if he wouldn't be throwing such information in so randomly here.
And considered how popular the Aswang is, I would have expected a bigger section on vampires. And considered that first the vampire and now the viscera sucker have stories were ointments are used for the transformation, they seem more and more like witches. Also most of what I heard about aswang lore before that was associated with vampires (the whole chicken thing) is under viscera sucker here.
Now as for werewolves, he states that werewolves take the form of an animal at night, such as a dog, cat, bog, "or whatever they may choose" or "whichever animal [they meet] first."
But can it still be called a werewolf then if its shapes are that varied? In fact, this story of a female malakat seems to describe here has a clawed, very hairy human whose hair crawls into the victim's nose, ears, mouth and eyes. cool image, but werewolf? No.
And that was, at about 1/3 of the book, when it stopped to introduce us to those creatures and suddenly spoke about the importance of mythology, which did not sit well with me, but I was willing to give it a chance.
There were some interesting things in it, like a story where Hansel is the one killing the witch, while in the original tale it was Gretel and in the mentioned opera they did it together. Or that according to one study to most Filipinos, marriage to another Filipino is more desirable than marriage to a foreigner. And according to another study, the sample indicating their preference shows this order: American White, Spanish, Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and American Negro.
This chapter seems to have mostly been about society and nationalism. No idea if anything ever came out of it.
Later on, we got a little bit of interesting information about how the evidence of ethnocentrisms in Philippine society probably gets an added push from the belief that creatures are suspect whose pigmentation is darker than that of one's group or are fairer in complexion. And how someone named Dagot gave the information that in Palawan, many fair-skinned, good looking mestizo youths were forced into incestuous marriages because no brown-skinned Filipino would marry them.
Sadly, afterwards, I lost interest. Completely. So, the title is misleading in my mind and I would recommend to not expect too much from this book.
By that I seemed to have been more focused and clearer with my goals than the author of this. Sure, it had interesting information, but I really wondered why the author decided to make this book like this. Early on I asked myself why he did choose these European derived categories if he doesn't want to. Why not make categories of his own?
And if he wants to define dwarves as basically ill-favored little men who live on or under the ground, in crags, and in hills and mountains and Elves, on the other hand, are chiefly tree-dwelling creatures and are "handsomer and better made than men, although smaller,” let him.
I also think that in European folklore the transformation of a werewolf via ointment is the more common transformation and not via wolf pelt as this here states.
Now when he starts with his chapters, in a structure based on European categories, he has some interesting information but its structure us not good. The following one on dragons (which also mentions crocodile veneration among the Filipinos of old) has its shortcomings as well but is at least better structured and more cohesive. The one on demons seemed like he just threw in what he could find.
And what definition of “giant” is he using? According to him “giants may either be human, animal, or bird in form,” and the Philippine giants have human shape, with at least one of them, the bannog (banog, ban-og) of Northern Luzon, is in the shape of a bird, and another, the ikugan, has a simian form. But, like I said, then what is your definition of "giant?" This is a common problem here, the sometimes-inconsistent definitions. Several of the demons or ogres in this could therefore be giants as well.
And what is with this odd structure of the text? It cannot be due to the fact that this is a study (which the book should have stated on the title in my mind).
And why is a story about a golden centipede at the bottom of the water in the section on mermaids? Did it belong to a mermaid? Was it classified as a mermaid?
The basic structure of the chapters is fine but inside he is a bit chaotic. It is interesting to read about these ogres with their differing features or how Garuda turned from a deity to a shapeshifting ogre on it way to the Philippines, but it would be easier to read if he wouldn't be throwing such information in so randomly here.
And considered how popular the Aswang is, I would have expected a bigger section on vampires. And considered that first the vampire and now the viscera sucker have stories were ointments are used for the transformation, they seem more and more like witches. Also most of what I heard about aswang lore before that was associated with vampires (the whole chicken thing) is under viscera sucker here.
Now as for werewolves, he states that werewolves take the form of an animal at night, such as a dog, cat, bog, "or whatever they may choose" or "whichever animal [they meet] first."
But can it still be called a werewolf then if its shapes are that varied? In fact, this story of a female malakat seems to describe here has a clawed, very hairy human whose hair crawls into the victim's nose, ears, mouth and eyes. cool image, but werewolf? No.
And that was, at about 1/3 of the book, when it stopped to introduce us to those creatures and suddenly spoke about the importance of mythology, which did not sit well with me, but I was willing to give it a chance.
There were some interesting things in it, like a story where Hansel is the one killing the witch, while in the original tale it was Gretel and in the mentioned opera they did it together. Or that according to one study to most Filipinos, marriage to another Filipino is more desirable than marriage to a foreigner. And according to another study, the sample indicating their preference shows this order: American White, Spanish, Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and American Negro.
This chapter seems to have mostly been about society and nationalism. No idea if anything ever came out of it.
Later on, we got a little bit of interesting information about how the evidence of ethnocentrisms in Philippine society probably gets an added push from the belief that creatures are suspect whose pigmentation is darker than that of one's group or are fairer in complexion. And how someone named Dagot gave the information that in Palawan, many fair-skinned, good looking mestizo youths were forced into incestuous marriages because no brown-skinned Filipino would marry them.
Sadly, afterwards, I lost interest. Completely. So, the title is misleading in my mind and I would recommend to not expect too much from this book.
November 20, 2014
Aaaahhhhhh I've been searching for this book. I read this when I was nine. A good friend lent me this and I enjoyed it TOO much. Now I'm obsessed with local folklore.
February 3, 2023
This is the author's dissertation, published in book form. I absolutely loved the anecdotes. It provides for a rich material for other creative pursuits such as fiction, and visual art. It is also well researched and written in a language that is easy to understand, with examples from all over the Philippines.
I find his categorizations of mythological creatures awkward and Eurocentric. It is understandable however as this is written not long after Philippine independence, with different sensibilities from our time. There is some backlash about being "superstitious", and belief in these creatures versus science.
I am keen on reading Ramos's other books.
I find his categorizations of mythological creatures awkward and Eurocentric. It is understandable however as this is written not long after Philippine independence, with different sensibilities from our time. There is some backlash about being "superstitious", and belief in these creatures versus science.
I am keen on reading Ramos's other books.
January 26, 2025
A very interesting recording of the different creatures and monsters in Filipino folklore. I learned a lot and loved that this was not all lost to time.
June 29, 2016
interesting read.
I first came across this book when I was in High school. Apparently, our library has a copy of this book. (There was also a copy of "Philippine Myths, Legends, and Folktales" and "Philippine Demonological Legends and their Cultural Bearings"). But I don't know if those books are still there in my HS, because it's been a couple years since I've read Dr. Maximo Ramos' books.
The book is also available at University of the Philippines Diliman's Main library in the Filipiniana section.
The book's interesting for the content - description of Philippine Lower Mythology, compiled with tales of the unusual focusing on the supernatural. For the curious, it gives a list of the supernatural creatures supposedly inhabiting the Philippine islands. It also recounts various encounters and reports about these creatures - so it's an interesting read for those who liked a "story-telling" kind of book. I enjoyed reading it.
I first came across this book when I was in High school. Apparently, our library has a copy of this book. (There was also a copy of "Philippine Myths, Legends, and Folktales" and "Philippine Demonological Legends and their Cultural Bearings"). But I don't know if those books are still there in my HS, because it's been a couple years since I've read Dr. Maximo Ramos' books.
The book is also available at University of the Philippines Diliman's Main library in the Filipiniana section.
The book's interesting for the content - description of Philippine Lower Mythology, compiled with tales of the unusual focusing on the supernatural. For the curious, it gives a list of the supernatural creatures supposedly inhabiting the Philippine islands. It also recounts various encounters and reports about these creatures - so it's an interesting read for those who liked a "story-telling" kind of book. I enjoyed reading it.
November 3, 2012
Comprehensive companion for Philippine Studies and folklore. I used this book in my PS219 paper last semester.
Read
September 7, 2014be beautiful
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews