An Iron Age in the Philippines? A critical examination
by Dizon, Eusebio Zamora, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, 1988, 492 pages; AAT 8816166
Abstract (Summary)
Based on the limited evidence of iron artifacts and the associated pottery, it has been argued that a "Philippine Iron Age" began sometime between ca. 500-200 B.C. This study employing current archaeological and anthropological methods and metallurgical techniques analyzes the evidence for iron in the Philippines. It addresses whether the term "Iron Age" is viable in the Philippine context.

The appearance of iron in certain areas of the Old World is surveyed to provide information on how iron technology developed and was adopted elsewhere. The presence of an Iron Age can imply a complex social organization which assumes a political machinery and economic institutions that deal with the control, distribution and redistribution of resources. Technology is also a system that operates within this complex whole, providing the science and technical knowledge to manipulate resources for the society.

Philippine ethnographic and ethnohistorical records document that iron was supplied by Chinese traders in exchange for forest products, gold, salt, beads, etc. and that local blacksmiths processed iron for agriculture and household implements. Surpluses were traded to other groups, promoting the continuous diffusion of iron.

Ten iron samples from the Philippine National Museum and 75 samples from the Guthe-Michigan collection were examined metallographically. Microhardness testing was done for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Descriptive and exploratory statistics were used to construct a generalized typology.

The Guthe collection showed variability in morphology, metallurgical treatment and function, projecting a pattern of regional variation among artifact types. The metallography suggested an improvement in iron technology over time. There are no indications of mass or standardized production of iron implements, suggesting local production on a small scale.

This study concludes that there is no real Iron Age in the Philippines but that there were iron-using societies in certain areas beginning ca. 370 B.C. Finally, the study of iron technology constitutes a mechanism by which an improved understanding of the socio-cultural complexity of pre- and proto-historic cultures in the Philippines and Southeast Asia might be achieved.

Philippine ethnographic and ethnohistorical records document that iron was supplied by Chinese traders in exchange for forest products, gold, salt, beads, etc. and that local blacksmiths processed iron for agriculture and household implements. Surpluses were traded to other groups, promoting the continuous diffusion of iron.

Ten iron samples from the Philippine National Museum and 75 samples from the Guthe-Michigan collection were examined metallographically. Microhardness testing was done for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Descriptive and exploratory statistics were used to construct a generalized typology.

Once I read that the ancient Filipinos just bought the scrap metal(broken bells and weapons) from Chinese traders and reprocessed it; it's even scientifically possible to pinpoint where it came from in China or SEA

IMHO it's still correct to speak of the Iron Age in the Philippines - in the Near East and Europe, where this classification was made, there is large variation in time of the use of Iron -- just that it was traded to somewhere else doesn't mean that somebody didn't have a "genuine" Iron Age. It even speaks more positively of the complexity of trading networks and metallurgy.

yep,we don't know how to mine iron that time,,that is the proof that colonial mentality of filipinos is present before the hispanic era,i hope that this mentality dissapears.