Chapter 2: Content and Contextual Analysis of

Selected Primary Sources in Philippine History

In the preceding chapter, we have discussed the importance of familiarizing

oneself about the different kinds of historical sources. The historian's primary
tool of understanding and interpreting the past is the historical sources.
Historical sources ascertain historical facts. Such facts are then analyzed and
interpreted by the historian to weave historical narrative. Specifically,
historians who study certain historical subjects and events need to make use
of various primary sources in order to weave the narrative. Primary sources,
as discussed in the preceding chapter, consist of documents, memoir,
accounts, and other materials that were produced at the period of the event or
subject being studied.

Using primary sources in historical research entails two kinds of criticism. The
first one is the external criticism, and the second one is the internal criticism.
External criticism examines the authenticity of the document or the evidence
being used. This is important in ensuring that the primary source is not
fabricated. On the other hand, internal criticism examines the truthfulness of
the content of the evidence. However, this criticism requires not just the act
establishing truthfulness and/or accuracy but also the examination of the
primary sources in terms of the context of its production. For example, a
historian would have to situate the document in the period of its production, or
in the background of its authors. In other words, it should be recognized that
facts are neither existing in a vacuum nor produced from a blank slate. These
are products of the time and of the people. In this chapter, we are going to
look at a number of primary sources from different historical periods and
evaluate these documents' content in terms of historical value, and examine
the context of their production. The primary sources that we are going to
examine are Antonio Pigafetta's First Voyage Around the World, Emilio
Jacinto's "Kartilya ng Katipunan," the 1898 Declaration of Philippine
Independence, Political Cartoon's Alfred McCoy's Philippine Cartoons:
Political Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941), and Corazon Aquino's
speech before the U.S. Congress. These primary sources range from
chronicles, official documents, speeches, and cartoons to visual arts.
Needless to say, different types of sources necessitate different kinds of
analysis and contain different levels of importance. We are going to explore
that in this chapter.

A Brief Summary of the First Voyage Around the World by

Magellan by Antonio Pigafetta

This book was taken from the chronicles of contemporary voyagers and
navigators of the sixteenth century. One of them was Italian nobleman
Antonio Pigafetta, who accompanied Ferdinand Magellan in his fateful
circumnavigation of the world. Pigafetta's work instantly became a classic that
prominent literary men in the West like William Shakespeare, Michel de
Montaigne, and Giambattista Vico referred to the book in their interpretation of

1
the New World. Pigafetta's travelogue is one of the most important primary
sources in the study of the precolonial Philippines. His account was also a
major referent to the events leading to Magellan's arrival in the Philippines, his
encounter with local leaders, his death in the hands of Lapulapu's forces in
the Battle of Mactan, and in the departure of what was left of Magellan's fleet
from the islands Examining the document reveals several insights not just in
the character of the Philippines during the precolonial period, but also on how
the fresh eyes of the Europeans regard a deeply unfamiliar terrain,
environment, people, and culture. Locating Pigafetta's account in the context
of its writing warrants a familiarity on the dominant frame of mind in the age of
exploration, which pervaded Europe in the fifteenth and sixteenth century.
Students of history need to realize that primary sources used in the
subsequent written histories depart from certain perspectives. Thus,
Pigafetta's account was also written from the perspective of Pigafetta himself
and was a product of the context of its production. The First Voyage Around
the World by Magellan was published after Pigafetta returned to Italy. For this
chapter, we will focus on the chronicles of Antonio Pigafetta as he wrote his
firsthand observation and general impression of the Far East including their
experiences in the Visayas. In Pigafetta's account, their fleet reached what he
called the Ladrones Islands or the "Islands of the Thieves."

He recounted: "These people have no arms, but use sticks, which have a fish
bone at the end. They are poor, but ingenious, and great thieves, and for the
sake of that we called these three islands the Ladrones Islands."

The Ladrones Islands is presently known as the Marianas Islands. These

islands are located south-southeast of Japan, west-southwest of Hawaii, north
of New Guinea, and east of Philippines. Ten days after they reached
Ladrones Islands, Pigafetta reported that they reached what Pigafetta called
the isle of Zamal, now Samar but Magellan decided to land in another
uninhabited island for greater security where they could rest for a few days.
Pigafetta recounted that after two days, March 18, nine men came to them
and showed joy and eagerness in seeing them. Magellan realized that the
men were reasonable and welcomed them with food, drinks, and gifts. In turn,
the natives gave them fish, palm wine (uraca), figs, and two cochos. The
natives also gave them rice (umai), cocos, and other food supplies. Pigafetta
detailed in amazement and fascination the palm tree which bore fruits called
cocho, and wine. He also described what seemed like a coconut.

His description reads:

"This palm produces a fruit named cocho, which is as large as the head, or
thereabouts: its first husk is green, and two fingers in thickness, in it they find
certain threads, with which they make the cords for fastening their boats.
Under this husk there is another very hard, and thicker than that of a walnut.
They burn this second rind, and make with it a powder which is useful to
them. Under this rind there is a white marrow of a finger's thickness, which
they eat fresh with meat and fish, as we do bread, and it has the taste of an
almond, and if anyone dried it he might make bread of it.”

2
Pigafetta characterized the people as "very familiar and friendly" and willingly
showed them different islands and the names of these islands. The fleet went
to Humunu Island (Homonhon) and there they found what Pigafetta referred
to as the "Watering Place of Good Signs." It is in this place where Pigafetta
wrote that they found the first signs of gold in the island. They named the
island with the nearby islands as the archipelago of St. Lazarus. They left the
island, then on March 25th, Pigafetta recounted that they saw two ballanghai
(balangay), a long boat full of people in Mazzava/ Mazaua. The leader, who
Pigafetta referred to as the king of the ballanghai (balangay), sent his men to
the ship of Magellan. The Europeans entertained these men and gave them
gifts. When the king of the balangay offered to give Magellan a bar of gold
and a chest of ginger, Magellan declined. Magellan sent the interpreter to the
king and asked for money for the needs of his ships and expressed that he
came into the islands as a friend and not as an enemy. The king responded
by giving Magellan the needed provisions of food in chinaware. Magellan
exchanged gifts of robes in Turkish fashion, red cap, and gave the people
knives and mirrors. The two then expressed their desire to become brothers.
Magellan also boasted of his men in armor who could not be struck with
swords and daggers. The king was fascinated and remarked that men in such
armor could be worth one hundred of his men. Magellan further showed the
king his other weapons, helmets, and artilleries. Magellan also shared with the
king his charts and maps and shared how they found the islands. After a few
days, Magellan was introduced to the king's brother who was also a king of
another island. They went to this island and Pigafetta reported that they saw
mines of gold. The gold was abundant that parts of the ship and of the house
of the second king were made of gold. Pigafetta described this king as the
most handsome of all the men that he saw in this place. He was also adorned
with silk and gold accessories like a golden dagger, which he carried with him
in a wooden polished sheath. This king was named Raia Calambu, king of
Zuluan and Calagan (Butuan and Caragua), and the first king was Raia Siagu.
On March 31st, which happened to be Easter Sunday, Magellan ordered the
chaplain to preside a Mass by the shore. The king heard of this plan and sent
two dead pigs and attended the Mass with the other king. Pigafetta reported
that both kings participated in the mass. He wrote:

“... when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings, went to kiss the cross
like us, but they offered nothing, and at the elevation of the body of our Lord
they were kneeling like us, and adored our Lord with joined hands."

After the Mass, Magellan ordered that the cross be brought with nails and
crown in place. Magellan explained that the cross, the nail, and the crown
were the signs of his emperor and that he was ordered to plant it in the places
that he would reach. Magellan further explained that the cross would be
beneficial for their people because once other Spaniards saw this cross, then
they would know that they had been in this land and would not cause them
troubles, and any person who might be held captives by them would be
released. The king concurred and allowed for the cross to be planted. This
Mass would go down in history as the first Mass in the Philippines, and the
cross would be the famed Magellan's Cross still preserved at present day.

3
After seven days, Magellan and his men decided to move and look for islands
where they could acquire more supplies and provisions. They learned of the
islands of Ceylon (Leyte), Bohol, and Zzubu (Cebu) and intended to go there.
Raia Calambu offered to pilot them in going to Cebu, the largest and the
richest of the islands. By April 7th of the same year, Magellan and his men
reached the port of Cebu. The king of Cebu, through Magellan's interpreter,
demanded that they pay tribute as it was customary, but Magellan refused.
Magellan said that he was a captain of a king himself and thus would not pay
tribute to other kings. Magellan's interpreter explained to the king of Cebu that
Magellan's king was the emperor of a great empire and that it would do them
better to make friends with them than to forge enmity. The king of Cebu
consulted his council. By the next day, Magellan's men and the king of Cebu,
together with other principal men of Cebu, met in an open space. There, the
king offered a bit of his blood and demanded that Magellan do the same.
Pigafetta recounts:

"Then the king said that he was content, and as a greater sign of affection he
sent him a little of his blood from his right arm, and wished he should do the
like. Our people answered that he would do it. Besides that, he said that all
the captains who came to his country had been accustomed to make a
present to him, and he to them, and therefore they should ask their captain if
he would observe the custom. Our people answered that he would; but as the
king wished to keep up the custom, let him begin and make a present, and
then the captain would do his duty."

The following day, Magellan spoke before the people of Cebu about peace
and God. Pigafetta reported that the people took pleasure in Magellan's
speech. Magellan then asked the people who would succeed the king after his
reign and the people responded that the eldest child of the king, who
happened to be a daughter, would be the next in line. Pigafetta also related
how the people talked about, how at old age, parents were no longer taken
into account and had to follow the orders of their children as the new leaders
of the land. Magellan responded to this by saying that his faith entailed
children to render honor and obedience to their parents. Magellan preached
about their faith further and people were reportedly convinced. Pigafetta wrote
that their men were overjoyed seeing that the people wished to become
Christians through their free will and not because they were forced or
intimidated.

On the 14th of April, the people gathered with the king and other principal
men of the islands. Magellan spoke to the king and encouraged him to be a
good Christian by burning all of the idols and worship the cross instead. The
king of Cebu was then baptized as a Christian. Pigafetta wrote:

"To that the king and all his people answered that thy would obey the
commands of the captain and do all that he told them. The captain took the
king by the hand, and they walked about on the scaffolding, and when he was
baptized he said that he would name him Don Charles (Carlos), as the
emperor his sovereign was named; and he named the prince Don Fernand
(Fernando), after the brother of the emperor, and the King of Mazavva, Jehan:

4
to the Moor he gave the name of Christopher, and to the others each a name
of his fancy."

After eight days, Pigafetta counted that all of the island's inhabitant were
already baptized. He admitted that they burned a village down for obeying
neither the king nor Magellan. The Mass was conducted by the shore every
day. When the queen came to the Mass one day, Magellan gave her an
image of the Infant Jesus made by Pigafetta himself. The king of Cebu swore
that he would always be faithful to Magellan. When Magellan reiterated that all
of the newly baptized Christians need to burn their idols, but the natives gave
excuses telling Magellan that they needed the idols to heal a sick man who
was a relative to the king. Magellan insisted that they should instead put their
faith in Jesus Christ. They went to the sick man and baptized him. After the
baptismal, Pigafetta recorded that the man was able to speak again. He called
this a miracle.

On the 26th of April, Zula, a principal man from the island of Matan (Mactan)
went to see Magellan and asked him for a boat full of men so that he would be
able to fight the chief named Silapulapu (Lapulapu). Such chief, according to
Zula, refused to obey the king and was also preventing him from doing so.
Magellan offered three boats instead and expressed his desire to go to
Mactan himself to fight the said chief. Magellan's forces arrived in Mactan in
daylight. They numbered 49 in total and the islanders of Mactan were
estimated to number 1,500. The battle began. Pigafetta recounted:

"When we reached land we found the islanders fifteen hundred in number,

drawn up in three squadrons; they came down upon us with terrible shouts,
two squadrons attacking us on the flanks, and the third in front. The captain
then divided his men in two bands. Our musketeers and crossbow-men fired
for half an hour from a distance, but did nothing, since the bullets and arrows,
though they passed through their shields made of thin wood, and perhaps
wounded their arms, yet did not stop them. The captain shouted not to fire,
but he was not listened to. The islanders seeing that the shots of our guns did
them little or no harm would not retire, but shouted more loudly, and springing
from one side to the other to avoid our shots, they at the same time drew
nearer to us, throwing arrows, javelins, spears hardened in fire, stones, and
even mud, so that we could hardly defend ourselves. Some of them cast
lances pointed with iron at the captain-general."

Magellan died in that battle. The natives, perceiving that the bodies of the
enemies were protected with armors, aimed for their legs instead. Magellan
was pierced with a poisoned arrow in his right leg. A few of their men charged
at the natives and tried to intimidate them by burning an entire village but this
only enraged the natives further. Magellan was specifically targeted because
the natives knew that he was the captain general. Magellan was hit with a
lance in the face. Magellan retaliated and pierced the same native with his
lance in the breast and tried to draw his sword but could not lift it because of
his wounded arm. Seeing that the captain has already deteriorated, more
natives came to attack him. One native with a great sword delivered a blow in
Magellan's left leg, brought him face down and the natives ceaselessly

5
attacked Magellan with lances, swords, and even with their bare hands.
Pigafetta recounted the last moments of Magellan:

"Whilst the Indians were thus overpowering him, several times he turned
round towards us to see if we were all in safety, as though his obstinate fight
had no other object than to give an opportunity for the retreat of his men."

Pigafetta also said that the king of Cebu who was baptized could have sent
help but Magellan instructed him not to join the battle and stay in the balangay
so that he would see how they fought. The king offered the people of Mactan
gifts of any value and amount in exchange of Magellan's body but the chief
refused. They wanted to keep Magellan's body as a memento of their victory.

Magellan's men elected Duarte Barbosa as the new captain. Pigafetta also
told how Magellan's slave and interpreter named Henry betrayed them and
told the king of Cebu that they intended to leave as quickly as possible.
Pigafetta alleged that the slave told the king that if he followed the slave's
advice, then the king could acquire the ships and the goods of Magellan's
fleet. The two conspired and betrayed what was left of Magellan's men. The
king invited these men to a gathering where he said he would present the
jewels that he would send for the King of Spain. Pigafetta was not able to join
the twenty-four men who attended because he was nursing his battle wounds.
It was only a short time when they heard cries and lamentations. The natives
had slain all of the men except the interpreter and Juan Serrano who was
already wounded. Serrano was presented and shouted at the men in the ship
asking them to pay ransom so he would be spared. However, they refused
and would not allow anyone to go to the shore. The fleet departed and
abandoned Serrano. They left Cebu and continued their journey around the
world.

Analysis of Pigafetta's Chronicle

The chronicle of Pigafetta was one of the most cited documents by historians
who wished to study the precolonial Philippines. As one of the earliest written
accounts, Pigafetta was seen as a credible source for a period, which was
prior unchronicled and undocumented. Moreover, being the earliest detailed
documentation, it was believed that Pigafetta's writings account for the
"purest" precolonial society. Indeed, Pigafetta's work is of great importance in
the study and writing of Philippine history. Nevertheless, there needs to have
a more nuanced reading of the source within a contextual backdrop. A student
of history should recognize certain biases accompanying the author and his
identity, loyalties, and the circumstances that he was in; and how it affected
the text that he produced. In the case of Pigafetta, the reader needs to
understand that he was a chronicler commissioned by the King of Spain to
accompany and document a voyage intended to expand the Spanish empire.
He was also of noble descent who came from a rich family in Italy. These
attributes influenced his narrative, his selection of details to be included in the
text, his characterization of the people and of the species that he

6
encountered, and his interpretation and retelling of the events. Being a
scholar of cartography and geography, Pigafetta was able to give details on
geography and climate of the places that their voyage had reached.

In reading Pigafetta's description of the people, one has to keep in mind that
he was coming from a sixteenth century European perspective. Hence, the
reader might notice how Pigafetta, whether implicitly or explicitly, regarded the
indigenous belief systems and way of life as inferior to that of Christianity and
of the Europeans. He would always remark on the nakedness of the natives
or how he was fascinated by their exotic culture. Pigafetta also noticeably
emphasized the natives' amazement and illiteracy to the European artillery,
merchandise, and other goods, in the same way that Pigafetta repeatedly
mentioned the abundance of spices like ginger, and of precious metals like
gold. His observations and assessments of the indigenous cultures employed
the European standards. Hence, when they saw the indigenous attires of the
natives, Pigafetta saw them as being naked because from the European
standpoint, they were wearing fewer clothes indeed. Pigafetta's perspective
was too narrow to realize that such attire was only appropriate to the tropical
climate of the islands. The same was true for materials that the natives used
for their houses like palm and bamboo. These materials would let more air
come through the house and compensate for the hot climate in the islands.

It should be understood that such observations were rooted from the context
of Pigafetta and of his era. Europe, for example, was dominated by the Holy
Roman Empire, whose loyalty and purpose was the domination of the
Catholic Church all over the world. Hence, other belief systems different from
that of Christianity were perceived to be blasphemous and barbaric, even
demonic. Aside from this, the sixteenth century European economy was
mercantilist. Such system measures the wealth of kingdoms based on their
accumulation of bullions or precious metals like gold and silver. It was not
surprising therefore that Pigafetta would always mention the abundance of
gold in the islands as shown in his description of leaders wearing gold rings
and golden daggers, and of the rich gold mines. An empire like that of the
Spain would indeed search for new lands where they could acquire more gold
and wealth to be on top of all the European nations. The obsession with
spices might be odd for Filipinos because of its ordinariness in the Philippines,
but understanding the context would reveal that spices were scarce in Europe
and hence were seen as prestige goods. In that era, Spain and Portugal
coveted the control of Spice Islands because it would have led to a certain
increase in wealth, influence, and power. These contexts should be used and
understood in order to have a more qualified reading of Pigafetta's account.

The KKK and the "Kartilya ng Katipunan"

The Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan
(KKK) or Katipunan is arguably the most important organization formed in the
Philippine history. While anti-colonial movements, efforts. and organizations
had already been established centuries prior to the foundation of the
Katipunan, it was only this organization that envisioned (1) a united Filipino
nation that would revolt against the Spaniards for (2) the total independence

7
of the country from Spain. Previous armed revolts had already occurred
before the foundation of the Katipunan, but none of them envisioned a unified
Filipino nation revolting against the colonizers. For example, Diego Silang was
known as an Ilocano who took up his arms and led one of the longest running
revolts in the country. Silang, however, was mainly concerned about his
locality and referred to himself as El Rey de Ilocos (The King of Ilocos). The
imagination of the nation was largely absent in the aspirations of the local
revolts before Katipunan. On the other hand, the propaganda movements led
by the ilustrados like Marcelo H. del Pilar, Graciano López Jaena, and Jose
Rizal did not envision a total separation of the Philippines from Spain, but only
demanded equal rights, representation, and protection from the abuses of the
friars.

In the conduct of their struggle, Katipunan created a complex structure and a

defined value system that would guide the organization as a collective
aspiring for a single goal. One of the most important Katipunan documents
was the Kartilya ng Katipunan. The original title of the document was "Manga
[sic] Aral Nang [sic] Katipunan ng mga A.N.B." or "Lessons of the
Organization of the Sons of Country." The document was written by Emilio
Jacinto in the 1896. Jacinto was only 18 years old when he joined the
movement. He was a law student at the Universidad de Santo Tomas.
Despite his youth, Bonifacio recognized the value and intellect of Jacinto that
upon seeing that Jacinto's Kartilya was much better than the Decalogue he
wrote, he willingly favored that the Kartilya be distributed to their fellow
Katipuneros. Jacinto became the secretary of the organization and took
charge of the short-lived printing press of the Katipunan. On 15 April 1897,
Bonifacio appointed Jacinto as a commander of the Katipunan in Northern
Luzon. Jacinto was 22 years old. He died of Malaria at a young age of 24 in
the town of Magdalena, Laguna. The Kartilya can be treated as the
Katipunan's code of conduct. It contains fourteen rules that instruct the way a
Katipunero should behave, and which specific values should he uphold.
Generally, the rules stated in the Kartilya can be classified into two. The first
group contains the rules that will make the member an upright individual and
the second group contains the rules that will guide the way he treats his fellow
men.

Below is the translated version of the rules in Kartilya:

I. The life that is not consecrated to a lofty and reasonable purpose is a tree
without a shade, if not a poisonous weed.
II. To do good for personal gain and not for its own sake is not virtue.
III. It is rational to be charitable and love one's fellow creature, and to adjust
one's conduct, acts and words to what is in itself reasonable.
IV. Whether our skin be black or white, we are all born equal: superiority in
knowledge, wealth and beauty are to be understood, but not superiority by
nature.
V. The honorable man prefers honor to personal gain; the scoundrel, gain to
honor.
VI. To the honorable man, his word is sacred.

8
VII. Do not waste thy time: wealth can be recovered but not time lost.
VIII. Defend the oppressed and fight the oppressor before the law or in the
field.
IX. The prudent man is sparing in words and faithful in keeping secrets.
X. On the thorny path of life, man is the guide of woman and the children, and
if the guide leads to the precipice, those whom he guides will also go there.
XI. Thou must not look upon woman as a mere plaything, but as a faithful
companion who will share with thee the penalties of life; her (physical)
weakness will increase thy interest in her and she will remind thee of the
mother who bore thee and reared thee.
XII. What thou dost not desire done unto thy wife, children, brothers and
sisters, that do not unto the wife, children. brothers and sisters of thy
neighbor.
XIII. Man is not worth more because he is a king, because his nose is
aquiline, and his color white, not because he is a priest, a servant of God, nor
because of the high prerogative that he enjoys upon earth, but he is worth
most who is a man of proven and real value, who does good, keeps his
words, is worthy and honest; he who does not oppress nor consent to being
oppressed, he who loves and cherishes his fatherland though he be born in
the wilderness and know no tongue but his own.
XIV. When these rules of conduct shall be known to all, the longed- for sun of
Liberty shall rise brilliant over this most unhappy portion of the globe and its
rays shall diffuse everlasting joy among the confederated brethren of the
same rays, the lives of those who have gone before, the fatigues and the well-
paid sufferings will remain. If he who desires to enter has informed himself of
all this and believes he will be able to perform what will be his duties, he may
fill out the application for admission.

As the primary governing document, which determines the rules of conduct in

the Katipunan, properly understanding the Kartilya will thus help in
understanding the values, ideals, aspirations, and even the ideology of the
organization.

Analysis of the "Kartilya ng Katipunan" -

Similar to what we have done to the accounts of Pigafetta, this primary source
also needs to be analyzed in terms of content and context. As a document
written for a fraternity whose main purpose is to overthrow a colonial regime,
we can explain the content and provisions of the Kartilya as a reaction and
response to certain value systems that they found despicable in the present
state of things that they struggled against with. For example, the fourth and
the thirteenth rules in the Kartilya are an invocation of the inherent equality
between and among men regardless of race, occupation, success and
fulfillment of the Katipunan's ideals. For example, the Kartilya's teachings on
honoring one's word and not wasting time are teachinys directed toward self-
development, while the rules on treating the neighbor, wife, children, and
brothers the way that you want yours to be treated is an instruction on how
Katipuneros should treat and regard their neighbors. All in all, proper reading
of the Kartilya will reveal a more thorough understanding of the Katipunan and

9
the significant role that it played in the revolution and in the unfolding of the
Philippine history, as we know it.Reading the "Proclamation of the Philippine
Independence. Every year, the country commemorates the anniversary of the
Philippine Independence proclaimed on 12 June 1898, in the province of
Cavite. Indeed. such event is a significant turning point in the history of the
country because it signaled the end of the 333 years of Spanish colonization.
There have been numerous studies done on the events leading to the
independence of the country but very few students had the chance to read the
actual document of the declaration. This is in spite of the historical importance
of the document and the details that the document reveals on the rationale
and circumstances of that historical day in Cavite. Interestingly, reading the
details of the said document in hindsight is telling of the kind of government
that was created under Aguinaldo, and the forthcoming hand of the United
States of America in the next few years of the newly created republic. The
declaration was a short 2,000-word document, which summarized the reason
behind the revolution against Spain, the war for independence, and the future
of the new republic under Emilio Aguinaldo.

The proclamation commenced with a characterization of the conditions in the

Philippines during the Spanish colonial period. The document specifically
mentioned abuses and inequalities in the colony. The declaration says:

" ... taking into consideration, that their inhabitants being already weary of
bearing the ominous yoke of Spanish domination, on account of the arbitrary
arrests and harsh treatment practiced by the Civil Guard to the extent of
causing death with the connivance and even with the express orders of their
commanders, who sometimes went to the extreme of ordering the shooting of
prisoners under the pretext that they were attempting to escape, in violation of
the provisions of the Regulations of their Corps, which abuses were
unpunished and on account of the unjust deportations, especially those
decreed by General Blanco, of eminent personages and of high social
position, at the instigation of the Archbishop and friars interested in keeping
them out of the way for their own selfish and avaricious purpose, deportations
which are quickly brought about by a method of procedure more execrable
than that of the Inquisition and which every civilized nation rejects on account
of a decision being rendered without a hearing of the persons accused."

The above passage demonstrates the justifications behind the revolution

against Spain. Specifically cited are the abuse by the Civil Guards and the
unlawful shooting of prisoners whom they alleged as attempting to escape.
The passage also condemns the unequal protection of the law between the
Filipino people and the "eminent personages." Moreover, the line mentions
the avarice and greed of the clergy like the friars and the Archbishop himself.
Lastly, the passage also condemns what they saw as the unjust deportation
and rendering of other decision without proper hearing, expected of any
civilized nation.

From here, the proclamation proceeded with a brief historical overview of the
Spanish occupation since Magellan's arrival in Visayas until the Philippine
Revolution, with specific details about the latter, especially after the Pact of

10
Biak-na-Bato had collapsed. The document narrates the spread of the
movement "like an electric spark" through different towns and provinces like
Bataan, Pampanga, Batangas, Bulacan, Laguna, and Morong, and the quick
decline of Spanish forces in the same provinces. The revolt also reached
Visayas; thus, the independence of the country was ensured. The document
also mentions Rizal's execution, calling it unjust. The execution, as written in
the document, was done to "please the greedy body of friars in their insatiable
desire to seek revenge upon and exterminate all those who are opposed to
their Machiavellian purposes, which tramples upon the penal code prescribed
for these islands." The document also narrates the Cavite Mutiny of January
1872 that caused the infamous execution of the martyred native priests Jose
Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora, "whose innocent blood was
shed through the intrigues of those so-called religious orders" that incited the
three secular priests in the said mutiny. The proclamation of independence
also invokes that the established republic would be led under the dictatorship
of Emilio Aguinaldo. The firstmention was at the very beginning of the
proclamation.

It stated:
"In the town of Cavite Viejo, in this province of Cavite, on the twelfth day of
June eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, before me, Don Ambrosio Rianzares
Bautista, Auditor of War and Special Commissioner appointed to proclaim and
solemnize this act by the Dictatorial Government of these Philippine Islands,
for the purposes and by virtue of the circular addressed by the Eminent
Dictator of the same Don Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy."

The same was repeated toward the last part of the proclamation. It
states:

"We acknowledge, approve and confirm together with the orders that have
been issued therefrom, the Dictatorship established by Don Emilio Aguinaldo,
whom we honor as the Supreme Chief of this Nation, which this day
commences to have a life of its own, in the belief that he is the instrument
selected by God, in spite of his humble origin, to effect the redemption of this
unfortunate people, as foretold by Doctor Jose Rizal in the magnificent verses
which he composed when he was preparing to be shot, liberating them from
the yoke of Spanish domination in punishment of the impunity with which their
Government allowed the commission of abuses by its subordinates."

Another detail in the proclamation that is worth looking at is its explanation on

the Philippine flag that was first waved on the same day.
The document explained:
"And finally, it was unanimously resolved that this Nation, independent from
this day, must use the same flag used heretofore, whose design and colors
and described in the accompanying drawing, with design representing in
natural colors the three arms referred to. The white triangle represents the
distinctive emblem of the famous Katipunan Society,which by means of its
compact of blood urged on the masses of the people to insurrection; the three
stars represent the three principal Islands of this Archipelago, Luzon,
Mindanao and Panay, in which this insurrectionary movement broke out; the

11
sun represents the gigantic strides that have been made by the sons of this
land on the road of progress and civilization, its eight rays symbolizing the
eight provinces of Manila, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Bataan,
Laguna and Batangas, which were declared in a state of war almostas soon
as the first insurrectionary movement was initiated; and the colors blue, red
and white, commemorate those of the flag of the United States of North
America, in manifestation of our profound gratitude towards that Great Nation
for the disinterested protection she is extending to us and will
continue to extend to us."

This often overlooked detail reveals much about the historically accurate
meaning behind the most widely known national symbol in the Philippines. It
is not known by many for example, that the white triangle was derived from
the symbol of the Katipunan. The red and blue colors of the flag are often
associated with courage and peace, respectively. Our basic education omits
the fact that those colors were taken from the flag of the United States. While
it can always be argued that symbolic meaning can always change and be
reinterpreted, the original symbolic meaning of something presents us several
historical truths that can explain the subsequent events, which unfolded after
the declaration of independence on the 12th day of June 1898.

Analysis of the "Proclamation of the Philippine

Independence"

As mentioned earlier, a re-examination of the document on the declaration of

independence can reveal some often overlooked historical truths about this
important event in Philippine history. Aside from this, the document reflects
the general revolutionary sentiment of that period. For example, the abuses
specifically mentioned in the proclamation like friar abuse, racial
discrimination, and inequality before the law reflect the most compelling
sentiments represented by the revolutionary leadership. However, no mention
was made about the more serious problem that affected the masses more
profoundly (i.e., the land and agrarian crisis felt by the numerous Filipino
peasants in the nineteenth century). This is ironic especially when renowned
Philippine Revolution historian, Teodoro Agoncillo, stated that the Philippine
Revolution was an agrarian revolution. The common revolutionary soldiers
fought in the revolution for the hope of owning the lands that they were tilling
once the friar estates in different provinces like Batangas and Laguna
dissolve, if and when the revolution succeeded. Such aspects and realities of
the revolutionary struggle were either unfamiliar to the middle class
revolutionary leaders like Emilio Aguinaldo, Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista, and
Felipe Buencamino, or were intentionally left out because they were
landholders themselves.

The Treaty of Paris was an agreement signed between Spain and the United
States of America regarding the ownership of the Philippine Islands and other
Spanish colonies in South America. The agreement ended the short-lived
Spanish-American War. The Treaty was signed on 10 December 1898, six
months after the revolutionary government declared the Philippine

12
Independence. The Philippines was sold to the United States at $20 million
and effectively undermined the sovereignty of the Filipinos after their
revolutionary victory. The Americans occupied the Philippines immediately
which resulted in the Philippine-American War that lasted until the earliest
years of the twentieth century.

The proclamation also gives us the impression on how the victorious

revolutionary government of Aguinaldo historicized the struggle for
independence. There were mentions of past events that were seen as
important turning points of the movement against Spain. The execution of the
GOMBURZA, for example, and the failed Cavite Mutiny of 1872 was narrated
in detail. This shows that they saw this event as a significant awakening of the
Filipinos in the real conditions of the nation under Spain. Jose Rizal's legacy
and martyrdom was also mentioned in the document. However, the Katipunan
as the pioneer of the revolutionary movement was only mentioned once
toward the end of the document. There was no mention of the Katipunan's
foundation. Bonifacio and his co-founders were also left out. It can be argued,
thus, that the way of historical narration found in the document also reflects
the politics of the victors. The enmity between Aguinaldo's Magdalo and
Bonifacio's Magdiwang in the Katipunan is no secret in the pages of our
history. On the contrary, the war led by Aguinaldo's men with the forces of the
United States were discussed in detail.

The point is, even official records and documents like the proclamation of
independence, while truthful most of the time, still exude the politics and
biases of whoever is in power. This manifests in the selectiveness of
information that can be found in these records. It is the task of the historian,
thus, to analyze the content of these documents in relation to the dominant
politics and the contexts of people and institutions surrounding it. This tells us
a lesson on taking primary sources like official government records within the
circumstance of this production. Studying one historical subject, thus, entails
looking at multiple primary sources and pieces of historical evidences in order
to have a more nuanced and contextual analysis of our past.

A Glance at Selected Philippine Political Caricature in Alfred

McCoy's Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of
the American Era (1900-1941)

Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered
away from the classical art by exaggerating human features and poking fun at
its subjects. Such art genre and technique became a part of the print media
as a form of social and political commentary, which usually targets persons of
power and authority. Cartoons became an effective tool of publicizing opinions
through heavy use of symbolism, which is different from a verbose written
editorial and opinion pieces. The unique way that a caricature represents
opinion and captures the audience's imagination is reason enough for
historians to examine these political cartoons. Commentaries in mass media
inevitably shape public opinion and such kind of opinion is worthy of historical
examination.

13
In his book Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era
(1900-1941), Alfred McCoy, together with Alfredo Roces, compiled
political cartoons published in newspaper dailies and periodicals in the
aforementioned time period. For this part, we are going to look at selected
cartoons and explain the context of each one.

The first example shown above was published in The Independent on May 20,
1916. The cartoon shows a politician from Tondo, named Dr. Santos, passing
his crown to his brother-in-law, Dr. Barcelona. A Filipino guy (as depicted
wearing salakot and barong tagalog) was trying to stop Santos, telling the
latter to stop giving Barcelona the crown because it is not his to begin with.

14
15
Analysis of the Political Caricatures during the
American Period
The transition from the Spanish Colonial period to the American Occupation
period demonstrated different strands of changes and shifts in culture,

16
society, and politics. The Americans drastically introduced democracy to the
nascent nation and the consequences were far from ideal. Aside from this, it
was also during the American period that Filipinos were introduced to different
manifestations of modernity like healthcare, modern transportation, and
media. This ushered in a more open and freer press. The post-independence
and the post-Filipino-American period in the Philippines were experienced
differently by Filipinos coming from different classes. The upper principalia
class experienced economic prosperity with the opening up of the Philippine
economy to the United States but the majority of the poor Filipino remained
poor, desperate, and victims of state repression.

The selected cartoons illustrate not only the opinion of certain media outfits
about the Philippine society during the American period but also paint a broad
image of society and politics under the United States. In the arena of politics,
for example, we see the price that Filipinos paid for the democracy modeled
after the Americans. First, it seemed that the Filipino politicians at that time
did not understand well enough the essence of democracy and the
accompanying democratic institutions and processes. This can be seen in the
rising dynastic politics in Tondo as depicted in the cartoon published by The
Independent. Patronage also became influential and powerful, not only
between clients and patrons but also between the newly formed political
parties composed of the elite and the United States. This was depicted in the
cartoon where the United States, represented by Uncle Sam, provided dole
outs for members of the Federalista while the Nacionalista politicians looked
on and waited for their turn. Thus, the essence of competing political parties
to enforce choices among the voters was cancelled out. The problem
continues up to the present where politicians transfer from one party to
another depending on which party was powerful in specific periods of time.

The transition from a Catholic-centered, Spanish-Filipino society to an

imperial American-assimilated one, and its complications, were also depicted
in the cartoons. One example is the unprecedented increase of motorized
vehicles in the city. Automobiles became a popular mode of transportation in
the city and led to the emergence of taxis. However, the laws and policy
implementation was mediocre. This resulted in the increasing colorum and
unlicensed vehicles transporting people around the city. The rules governing
the issuance of driver's license was loose and traffic police could not be
bothered by rampant violations of traffic rules. This is a direct consequence of
the drastic urbanization of the Philippine society. Another example is what
McCoy called the "sexual revolution" that occurred in the 1930s. Young
people, as early as that period, disturbed the conservative Filipino mindset by
engaging in daring sexual activities in public spaces like cinemas. Here, we
can see how that period was the meeting point between the conservative past
and the liberated future of the Philippines.

Lastly, the cartoons also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the
Philippines now governed by the United States. From the looks of it, nothing
much has changed. For example, a cartoon depicted how police authorities
oppress petty Filipino criminals while turning a blind eye on hoarders who
monopolize goods in their huge warehouses (presumably Chinese

17
merchants). The other cartoon depicts how Americans controlled Filipinos
through seemingly harmless American objects. By controlling their
consciousness and mentality, Americans got to control and subjugate
Filipinos.

Revisiting Corazon Aquino's Speech Before the U.S.

Congress Corazon "Cory" Cojuangco Aquino functioned as the symbol of the
restoration of democracy and the overthrow of the Marcos Dictatorship in
1986. The EDSA People Power, which installed Cory Aquino in the
presidency. put the Philippines in the international spotlight for overthrowing a
dictator through peaceful means. Cory was easily a figure of the said
revolution, as the widow of the slain Marcos oppositionist and former Senator
Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino Jr. Cory was hoisted as the antithesis of the dictator.
Her image as a mourning, widowed housewife who had always been in the
shadow of her husband and relatives and had no experience in politics was
juxtaposed against Marcos's statesmanship, eloquence, charisma, and
cunning political skills. Nevertheless, Cory was able to capture the
imagination of the people whose rights and freedom had long been
compromised throughout the Marcos regime. This is despite the fact that Cory
came from a rich haciendero family in Tarlac and owned vast estates of sugar
plantation and whose relatives occupy local and national government
positions.

The People Power Revolution of 1986 was widely recognized around the
world for its peaceful character. When former senator Ninoy Aquino was shot
at the tarmac of the Manila International Airport on 21 August 1983, the
Marcos regime greatly suffered a crisis of legitimacy. Protests from different
sectors frequented different areas in the country. Marcos's credibility in the
international community also suffered. Paired with the looming economic
crisis, Marcos had to do something to prove to his allies in the United States
that he remained to be the democratically anointed leader of the country. He
called for a Snap Election in February 1986, where Corazon Cojuangco
Aquino, the widow of the slain senator was convinced to run against Marcos.
The canvassing was rigged to Marcos's favor but the people expressed their
protests against the corrupt and authoritarian government. Leading military
officials of the regime and Martial Law orchestrators themselves, Juan Ponce
Enrile and Fidel V. Ramos, plotted to take over the presidency, until civilians
heeded the call of then Manila Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin and other
civilian leaders gathered in EDSA. The overwhelming presence of civilians in
EDSA successfully turned a coup into a civilian demonstration. The thousands
of people who gathered overthrew Ferdinand Marcos fromthe presidency after
21 years.

On 18 September 1986, seven months since Cory became president, she

went to the United States and spoke before the joint session of the U.S.
Congress. Cory was welcomed with long applause as she took the podium
and addressed the United States about her presidency and the challenges
faced by the new republic. She began her speech with the story of her leaving
the United States three years prior as a newly widowed wife of Ninoy Aquino.

18
She then told of Ninoy's character, conviction, and resolve in opposing the
authoritarianism of Marcos. She talked of the three times that they lost Ninoy
including his demise on 23 August 1983. The first time was when the
dictatorship detained Ninoy with other dissenters. Cory related:

"The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked
him up in a tiny, nearly airless cell in a military camp in the north. They
stripped him naked and held a threat of a sudden midnight execution over his
head. Ninoy held up manfully under all of it. I barely did as well. For forty-three
days, the authorities would not tell me what had happened to him. This was
the first time my children and I felt we had lost him."

Cory continued that when Ninoy survived that first detention, he was then
charged of subversion, murder, and other crimes. He was tried by a military
court, whose legitimacy Ninoy adamantly questioned. To solidify his protest,
Ninoy decided to do a hunger strike and fasted for 40 days. Cory treated this
event as the second time that their family lost Ninoy. She said:

"When that didn't work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder and a host
of other crimes before a military commission. Ninoy challenged its authority
and went on a fast. If he survived it, then he felt God intended him for another
fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back from his
determination to see his fast through to the end. He stopped only when it
dawned on him that the government would keep his body alive after the fast
had destroyed his brain. And so, with barely any life in his body, he called off
the fast on the 40th day."

Ninoy's death was the third and the last time that Cory and their children lost
Ninoy. She continued:
"And then, we lost him irrevocably and more painfully than in the past. The
news came to us in Boston. It had to be after the three happiest years of our
lives together. But his death was my country's resurrection and the courage
and faith by which alone they could be free again. The dictator had called him
anobody. Yet, two million people threw aside their passivity and fear and
escorted him to his grave."

Cory attributed the peaceful EDSA Revolution to the martyrdom of Ninoy. She
stated that the death of Ninoy sparked the revolution and the responsibility of
"offering the democratic alternative" had "fallen on (her) shoulders." Cory's
address introduced us to her democratic philosophy. which she claimed she
also acquired from Ninoy. She argued:

"I held fast to Ninoy's conviction that it must be by the ways of democracy. I
held out for participation in the 1984 election the dictatorship called, even if I
knew it would be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of the opposition, that I
ran the grave risk of legitimizing the foregone results of elections that were
clearly going to be fraudulent. But I was not fighting for lawyers but for the
people in whose intelligence, I had implicit faith. By the exercise of democracy
even in a dictatorship, they would be prepared for democracy when it came.
And then also, it was the only way I knew by which we could measure our

19
power even in the terms dictated by the dictatorship. The people vindicated
me in an election shamefully marked by government thuggery and fraud. The
opposition swept the elections, garnering a clear majority of the votes even if
they ended up (thanks to a corrupt Commission on Elections) with barely a
third of the seats in Parliament. Now, I knew our power."

Cory talked about her miraculous victory through the people's struggle and
continued talking about her earliest initiatives as the president of a restored
democracy. She stated that she intended to forge and draw reconciliation
after a bloody and polarizing dictatorship. Cory emphasized the importance of
the EDSA Revolution in terms of being a "limited revolution that respected the
life and freedom of every Filipino." She also boasted of the restoration of a
fully constitutional government whose constitution gave utmost respect to the
Bill of Rights. She reported to the U.S. Congress:

"Again as we restore democracy by the ways of democracy, so are we

completing the constitutional structures of our new democracy under a
constitution that already gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A jealously
independent constitutional commission is completing its draft which will be
submitted later this year to a popular referendum. When it is approved, there
will be elections for both national and local positions. So, within about a year
from a peaceful but national upheaval that overturned a dictatorship, we shall
have returned to full constitutional government."

Cory then proceeded on her peace agenda with the existing communist
insurgency, aggravated by the dictatorial and authoritarian measure of
Ferdinand Marcos. She asserted:

"My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist insurgency

that numbered less than five hundred. Unhampered by respect for human
rights he went at it with hammer and tongs. By the time he fled, that
insurgency had grown to more than sixteen thousand. I think there is a lesson
here to be learned about trying to stifle a thing with a means by which it
grows."

Cory's peace agenda involves political initiatives and re-integration program to

persuade insurgents to leave the countryside and return to the mainstream
society to participate in the restoration of democracy. She invoked the path of
peace because she believed that it was the moral path that a moral
government must take. Nevertheless, Cory took a step back when she said
that while peace is the priority of her presidency, she "will not waiver" when
freedom and democracy are threatened. She said that, similar to Abraham
Lincoln, she understands that "force may be necessary before mercy" and
while she did not relish the idea, she "will do whatever it takes to defend the
integrity and freedom of (her) country." Cory then turned to the controversial
topic of the Philippine foreign debt amounting to $26 billion at the time of her
speech. This debt had ballooned during the Marcos regime. Cory expressed
her intention to honor those debts despite mentioning that the people did not
benefit from such debts. Thus. she mentioned her protestations about the way

20
the Philippines was deprived of choices to pay those debts within the capacity
of the Filipino people. She lamented:

"Finally may I turn to that other slavery, our twenty-six billion dollar foreign
debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet, the means by which we shall be
able to do so are kept from us. Many of the conditions imposed on the
previous government that stole this debt, continue to be imposed on us who
never benefited from it."

She continued that while the country had experienced the calamities brought
about by the corrupt dictatorship of Marcos, no commensurate assistance was
yet to be extended to the Philippines. She even remarked that given the
peaceful character of EDSA People Power Revolution, "ours must have been
the cheapest revolution ever." She demonstrated that Filipino people fulfilled
the "most difficult condition of the debt negotiation," which was the "restoration
of democracy and responsible government."

Cory related to the U.S. legislators that wherever she went, she met poor and
unemployed Filipinos willing to offer their lives for democracy. She stated:

"Wherever I went in the campaign, slum area or impoverished village. They

came to me with one cry, democracy. Not food although they clearly needed it
but democracy. Not work, although they surely wanted it but democracy. Not
money, for they gave what little they had to my campaign. They didn't expect
me to work a miracle that would instantly put food into their mouths, clothes
on their back, education in their children and give them work that will put
dignity in their lives. But I feel the pressing obligation to respond quickly as the
leader of the people so deserving of all these things."

Cory proceeded in enumerating the challenges of the Filipino people as they

tried building the new democracy. These were the persisting communist
insurgency and the economic deterioration. Cory further lamented that these
problems worsened by the crippling debt because half of the country's export
earnings amounting to $2 billion would "go to pay just the interest on a debt
whose benefit the Filipino people never received." Cory then asked a rather
compelling question to the U.S. Congress:

"Has there been a greater test of national commitment to the ideals you hold
dear than that my people have gone through? You have spent many lives and
much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant to receive
it. And here, you have a people who want it by themselves and need only the
help to preserve it."

Cory ended her speech by thanking America for serving as home to her family
for what she referred to as the "three happiest years of our lives together."
She enjoined America in building the Philippines as a new home
for democracy and in turning the country as a "shining testament of our two
nations' commitment to freedom."

21
Analysis of Cory Aquino's Speech
- Cory Aquino's speech was an important event in the political and diplomatic
history of the country because it has arguably cemented the legitimacy of the
EDSA government in the international arena. The speech talks of her family
background, especially her relationship with her late husband, Ninoy Aquino.
It is well known that it was Ninoy who served as the real leading figure of the
opposition at that time. Indeed, Ninoy's eloquence and charisma could very
well compete with that of Marcos. In her speech, Cory talked at length about
Ninoy's toil and suffering at the hands of the dictatorship that he resisted.
Even when she proceeded talking about her new government, she still went
back to Ninoy's legacies and lessons. Moreover, her attribution of the
revolution to Ninoy's death demonstrates not only Cory's personal perception
on the revolution, but since she was the president, it also represents what the
dominant discourse was at that point in our history.

The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also be
seen in the same speech. Aquino was able to draw the sharp contrast
between her government and of her predecessor by expressing her
commitment to a democratic constitution drafted by an independent
commission. She claimed that such constitution upholds and adheres to the
rights and liberty of the Filipino people. Cory also hoisted herself as the
reconciliatory agent after more than two decades of a polarizing authoritarian
politics. For example, Cory saw the blown-up communist insurgency as a
product of a repressive and corrupt government. Her response to this
insurgency rooted from her diametric opposition of the dictator (i.e., initiating
reintegration of communist rebels to the mainstream Philippine society). Cory
claimed that her main approach to this problem was through peace and not
through the sword of war.

Despite Cory's efforts to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her
speech still revealed certain parallelisms between her and the Marcos's
government. This is seen in terms of continuing the alliance between the
Philippines and the United States despite the known affinity between the said
world super power and Marcos. The Aquino regime, as seen in Cory's
acceptance of the invitation to address the U.S. Congress and to the content
of the speech, decided to build and continue with the alliance between the
Philippines and the United States and effectively implemented an essentially
similar foreign policy to that of the dictatorship. For example, Cory recognized
that the large sum of foreign debts incurred by the Marcos regime never
benefitted the Filipino people. Nevertheless, Cory expressed her intention to
pay off those debts. Unknown to many Filipinos was the fact that there was a
choice of waiving the said debt because those were the debt of the dictator
and not of the country. Cory's decision is an indicator of her government's
intention to carry on a debt-driven economy.

Reading through Aquino's speech, we can already take cues, not just on
Cory's individual ideas and aspirations, but also the guiding principles and
framework of the government that she represented.

22