 As defined by law, cultural heritage refers to the totality of cultural property preserved and developed through time and passed on to posterity. Cultural property refers to all products of human creativity by which a people in a nation reveal their identity. These include churches, mosques, and other places of worship, schools, and natural history specimens and sites. Whether public or privately owned, movable or immovable, and tangible or intangible. In the series of lectures, esteemed educators from our national university lend pertinent discussions thus open academic discourses on Philippine cultural heritage relating to their respective fields of discipline and expertise. These can and may be used as resource materials for further learning and study. Well experienced and distinguished archaeologist Vic Pash shares his knowledge on the vital relationship between archaeology and heritage. He digs into this connection dissecting the elements, aspects, realms, processes, agenda, impacts, and challenges. According to him, archaeology is a systematic study of history that develops a heritage being tangible, which is physical, and intangible, which is conceptual. Hence he believes that the importance of archaeological studies on heritage deepens the consciousness and understanding of an identity which strengthens its culture. It provides a sense of being, a sense of belonging, a sense of worth, and a sense of pride which precede genuine development and progress of a state, nation, and people. Archaeological data and information must be discovered, analyzed, studied, and shared to inclusive and collaborative public archaeology as a sustainable heritage initiative. Archaeology and heritage is the first thing that we call Pamanan Lahi. Before we start, I would like to say that what I would like to share is the classic Pamanan. Let us first learn what archaeology means. What do we mean by heritage or Pamanan Lahi? And why is it so important that we can see the first two concepts? Archaeology is a systematic study of history. Its study is about the first cultures in the world, which means that we study the things that they left behind, and the things that were not left behind, but left behind in the land. Heritage or Pamanan Lahi is a big concept. But if we want to simplify it, this is Pagaari, Pamanan. And Pamanan or Pamanan. What this means is that people should be able to understand the things that they left behind. Heritage has two classes. We will talk about the English, tangible and intangible. The other two classes are like this. The intangible is what you see and what you hear. The intangible is what you hear, what you see, but it is not what you hear. It is more conceptual. In tangible heritage, we can say that we are still in the land. The natural that we see around us now has a deep connection to the culture of people and the things that were created by people, the cultural. For example, the natural is what we see in agriculture, the plants, such as mucayno, tubo, arayat, ganahau, mga kueba, mga... You can see the things that we see in tubo and arayat. Those are the living things, such as haring ebon or filipinigal. That is natural heritage or Pamanan life. The cultural that they have is the most beautiful example. It is in Ramuros. The place where the castles were made during the time before the 20th century. And the vegan is another example. Another good example that we can see in the whole of the Philippines are the plants that were grown on this rock. You can only see it in the three years that passed, but it is true that these plants were grown when it was around the 20th century. That is what we call tangible cultural heritage. But it is very difficult and very important that the intangible, the non-existent, to talk about, for example, about the joy in talking about the wisdom, the wisdom of the people. How do you get the wisdom? How do you explain it? And the first thing is that it is very difficult to say far away about the studies of the culture and the Pamanan life. But it is important that we can see what we can say about the Pamanan life. In the study of archeology, it is important that we do not only say tangible what we are studying, but we should learn and understand what we are saying in tangible. And the important thing is that we can see in our belief in the whole history of the people in the world that the creation of a culture, a group of people, in the talk of the same intangible and tangible heritage is the continuation of the growth of their culture because this is the continuation of the Pamanan life of the people in the Pamanan life of the people in the world. And that is very important to our Filipinos. We still need to understand why we are doing this. Archeology has a big impact on the Pamanan life. If we look again at the Pamanan life and the other sources of its importance, the sources of the country, the Republic of the Philippines, the Philippines, the sources of the country, to be a European country that is happy, the sources of the smaller communities and to be a part of a community of the people of the country. The importance of the Pamanan life is very central in its transformation. The biggest and most important is the Pamanan life of the people in the country and the country we are talking about now is the Republic of the Philippines. Now, archaeology is always used in the length of time of the states, of the republics all over the world and the Republic of the Philippines in the United States. In fact, early on, when the boots were found, the first people in the Pamanan life in Palawan even though this is 47,000 years old, this is Jacob and the State said and the Philippines that these are the Philippines. Even though the Philippines is not here, do we have a problem there? No, but we have to understand that they are not the Philippines, they are the Filipino people. And this kind of discourse is important for us to understand so that we know that archaeology is used in the length of the Pamanan life. If this is the length for everyone or the length for the people or the sector of the country. For example, we can remember that for the last six years, we have money for 1,000 pesos, where in the back are the chrysterises and the Manungu Jar. Manungu Jar is 1,000 and maybe 50 years of the life of the people in Palawan and this is an icon that we put in our money. It is gone now. But again, there are heritage icons that we can say are natural. There are no cultural heritage in our markers inside our money. For example, the State uses information from archaeology to identify the Pamanan life of the State or the country. Now, when will it come out? We really have something that we already know but it is still there. 709,000 years ago, there were poor people who were left in the same valley in Luzon along with the big hills and the big hills are elephants and rhinoceros. The rhinoceros that I saw fossilized are markers that are used and used stones to do this. But 709,000 years ago, we are not human anymore. We are not modern human anymore. Are these the Filipino? No. Are these part of our Pamanan life? Yes. And that is what happened. We are doing Pamanan life as a community, as a country. We should only do part of our life in our discourse on being a community of Filipinos. Now, in the Philippines, we use information from the archeology that is not used by the state, by the government, but by the people to say that this is part of our Filipino life. We should understand that. We should understand that if we go to the top of the country, where we can see that the communities, the provinces, the villages, the small towns, the villages and the villages the big towns that are used in our archeology to identify the people or the people in a community. I found that among my students in the Philippines in archeology, you can't really make in the Philippines that you will not be able to understand what you are doing in the community. We need to return the information, the information to the state, even if it is not to the state. Because they are the only ones, our fellow citizens, who are still living in the result of the new data or information that we will receive, starting from the early days of archeology. For example, there is a village in Bontoc Peninsula, where we lived there for a decade. We learned that there is still a big living there that has been around for thousands of years. And in that village, in Katanauan, there are people who have been living their lives for a long time, inside a big building that has been built, and inside there are all the people who have been living there. This is different because there is no community living there. And they don't know that. And when they found out that there is a big living in their result, the community has different views on their place of residence, and I think it helped them to find out who they are as a part of the community there in Katanauan. On the other side of the village, there are people who have been living in the result of the new data. We are called Sir Coffeguy. On the top of Bontoc Peninsula, in the beginning, this is different. There is only one class living in the Philippines. And because there is only one class living in the Philippines, the community has found out that they are the only ones living there. And because they are like that, they also have the same thing in our Prime, where they have different views on their country. And that has become a part of their membership in the village. In other words, it is not that difficult if we give them a view that they will share the knowledge of the children's education to the communities closest to where archaeologists do their research. Another good example is in the island of Tikau, in Montreal, in Masbate, there are people who are looking for a way to say bye-bye. And this is the good example, because the community does not need to give up. On the other side, they saw this, they said, this is for us, this should not happen. This should not happen in Manila and in the National Museum. This should be shown in Montreal, in Tikau. And because the negotiations are good, in the National Museum and the Mayor's Office in Tikau, they agreed on a good plan. Where? What we are saying is that it is displayed in Tikau and it is also displayed in the National Museum. We can see here that the people of Tikau may not be able to see this. If they do not have a view, they will not know that this is what we call bye-bye. The people who can see this in Palayo, or in their village, who can see this. In the third phase, we will be able to say that it is important, in the history, archeology, and the government, because this was done correctly, or was discussed, or was sensitive to the reaction of the community, we have the opportunity to raise the number of people we speak to. Why is it important to raise the number of people? I believe that it is important to use politics, to talk about the economy, to raise the number of people. This should not be repeated first, to raise the number of people. We should be able to raise the number of people and the economy and politics should not be raised first or try to raise the number of people. I believe that if you raise the number of people of a community, who they are, who they are, who they are as a part of a big community, they will be able to have not only income, but also income from their community to the government, they will be able to see where they are, where they are going. That means, you in English, you do because you raise the number of people in their culture, they will have a sense of belonging, sense of worth, and because of that, they will be able to have not only their income from their culture, but also their income from their community and how much they will be able to raise their community. The difference is, if you raise the number of people and their income, the economy and politics can be raised, but the taste of the people will be removed from their land and transferred to other places. And you are already lucky that they will be able to return their income to their community. That's why, in the discussion of archaeology, we did not only study to answer the questions we asked in our methodology, we also studied to make public archaeology. And this is what we will say in our discussion. We will talk about the impact of people at the beginning of our study. Public archaeology for me is the process of archaeology that we study. But right away, at the end of the study, it is explained to the communities, to the people around us that we study. Wherever in the Philippines or wherever in the world. In the Philippines, there are two types of public archaeology. The types of archaeology that come from the top, like the National Museum, the NCCA, the government institutions and their study is big. And the study is specific. It came from one place, from one site, from one province, and the study was not big. The difference between the two is when it comes to the top, you have more institutionalization, you have museums, you have programs, you have workshops, and that's what you do in many provinces, many villages in the Philippines. The smaller one that comes from the top is not created. It is really included in the research design of the people who work or do basic research in the part of the Philippines where they study. At the end of the study, at the end of the study, we will combine the archeology and the knowledge that we have seen. This will come from the top, from the institutions of the Philippines, from the villages or from the schools, from the researchers who do their research. The question is, how do we continue to do this? How can this be sustainable? At the end of the study, there are elements that we need to be aware of. First, there is no new data in basic research. Second, there is no data that is not sustainable if the government does not pass the law. Third, it is not sustainable if there is no part that is not sustainable. It will not continue if you will not organize organizations that will join people who have been in the community where the information came from. Next, there should be universities, colleges that continue to study how to be sustainable what we are saying initiative. And, again, as we are doing now, we should be part of the wider part of the country that is interested in the whole of the Philippines from the sectors that are studying to be sustainable and all of it will continue. Now, in basic research in the Philippines, there are only a few that we can continue to study and in their next study, there will be the next year that we can continue to be sustainable. One of those is again value. In terms of our good news the people who have been raised in Luzon, in Envali, in Angaso, in Malalacay, seven hundred nine thousand years ago, our friends in the middle of the time, we know that there are Malalacay there, and there are other archaeological sites there. The government, the local governments have a lot of information about this. And they have made arrangements to show the results of our research to ordinary people in Cagayan Valley. One example is in Cagayan Valley, we can see where, in Calau Cave, we can see the evidence of a class of people who are not the people we can say like us. These are just the people who can say that they are the people who are now in the Philippines. But they are not in the Philippines. And there, in the middle of the time, the government, the institutions, there is a potential to be sustainable. We can explain that, for example, in the middle of the time of archaeology, we can see that there are a lot of evidence. And because of that, the project can be said to be effective for ordinary people and because of that, there is a potential to be sustainable. Now, there is another in Mindanao, in Agusan Valley. In Agusan Valley, there are those who are and we know, the banks that we are going to visit and in the middle of the time of the year, there are a lot of other evidence. Other than the one that Lollong saw, that is now in the National Museum for Natural History, in Manila. So, from the natural and environmental heritage, we can see that Agusan Valley, in the help of the government, in the help of the communities that they have, they know that Lollong is using their knowledge in teaching to strengthen their idea of what we call community. Now, in talking about the support of the State, it is important to mention, that this is an important country, for example, the National Museum, Department of Tourism, NCCA, et cetera. In talking about the province, it is important for the government to know about the resources such as PCSD or Council for Sustainable Development and about the local government such as Mayor's Office and Mayor's Office. In everything, all of them are part of our community that is sustainable. That is why it is important to mention the schools themselves, the local government but it is important to mention the knowledge in teaching, in lectures, in workshops where we always say this is our knowledge and this is what we all do. That is what we do in the whole of the Philippines but I can't say what we do and what we say changes the opinion of the Filipinos in the conversation of our government and the government. While we are prerequisites to be sustainable that we can say changes, there is no in the whole of the Philippines that we can say that all of this is stronger. For example, the most difficult for everyone is to make a group that is part of the community that is stronger than that to make a group of people and they are doing it to make them a group of people or community. The closest thing I think of is the community where in a small community they do this. But there is a problem for example, in the national and provincial government the support is not that strong. Other than there is no local educational institution that can help us to separate from the children of archeology the knowledge that we say that we have their support. That is a problem. Universities outside of Manila outside of UP are struggling to do research institute or organizations that can do education. So they can help or do initiatives to make sustainable the ones they see the first challenges. One more thing to say is the sustainability of our actions of archeology and heritage is something that is important and this is the story of tourism. Where does it come from? There is a lot of debate but one thing that we can say is that the effect of tourism to all of our friends when you go to a place where you can see the archeological site or you can see other areas or other parts they will help tourists. The important thing is to make a kind of tourism that we can say sensitive to the needs or the distances that we call archeology and when you go to a place where you can see other countries. So let's look at basic research, state support basic community sharing in communities organizations collaborations with other types of institutions and the big part of tourism like here in the TVUB we really don't have what we can say is passed to all of us an element that will give a sustainable model for what we want to do. So in the context of countries and communities the use of archeology and other nascent heritage is good for the spread of bad countries and that's important. Other people can be one of the many people where they can see that they can be a part of or have an idea where they are living where they are and there there is a role of archeology in the context of what we see of the things that are part of the community not just a group of communities but also other parts of a community. For example if there are new buildings those buildings will also be part of the community if they are part of the archeology in their place. Another important point is nationalism is important but the nationalism that is that is a big change and not just in the countries and communities is a kind of nationalism and it can be a nationalism that is not good but if this is related to communities we can say that people are able to live because they have an idea that they are not a part of a small community that is big in the country that is why in the context of what we want to be part of the archeology is a way to improve the culture and the identity of the people. The people of the few communities they have an identity that is a way to be part of it. The country and the country can see important concepts of the future and their history will be a part of the archeology and heritage. The people can be part of it if we understand information and knowledge from archeology. And again the knowledge of archeology can be achieved by teaching of the agenda of archeology. In other words I believe that in the Philippines if you are studying archeology you cannot not watch it. The effect of this of archeology. At the end our lesson is to learn more about archeology. And the knowledge can be used in the first years of the culture. It is important to say that the people are sometimes different from others. What I want to say is that we are different and our experience is more important to the people who are watching us. And if that is what we can learn maybe we can avoid the mistakes and mistakes that we can use for everything to happen. I am Dr. Victor Paz from the University of the Philippines in Lima.