GEC 02 READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

INTRODUCTION
➢ MEANING AND RELEVANCE OF HISTORY

History is the happenings or events that happened in the past and can’t be undone. It
is also narrated in a chronological manner that can be found in the internet, history
books, and many other sources. “The goal of history is to tell a story about the
past which captures the essence of an event” (Crabtree, 2001). History is significant
because it helps people of today to draw conclusions and understandings on the
past events and happenings to be able to understand the present. It also acts as a
bridge that connects the present to the past; and gives people knowledge about the
different histories that happened in the past which provides understandings that
leads to the broadening of knowledge about different past events such as evolution of
man, cultures and beliefs of different races, etc.

➢ DISTINCTION OF PRIMARY SOURCES AND SECONDARY SOURCES

When it comes to researching, there are two types of sources: primary sources and
secondary sources.

Primary Sources these are sources that are first-hand or original documents that was
written/ created by the person who directly witnessed and experienced the certain event
or have direct knowledge about it. Some of the examples of primary sources are:
personal documents such as diaries, novels, speeches, personal narratives,
interviews, and firsthand stories; documents from research studies such as theses,
experiment results, reports, and findings; original documents such as original
manuscripts, government documents, etc.

Secondary Sources these are sources that interpret, discusses, and cites the original
source. So basically, it is the less accurate version of the primary source since it is not
authentic anymore because it does not came from the original person who witnessed
the event. Some of the examples are: published works such as articles,
journals, newspapers, textbooks; book reviews, book analysis, movie analysis, etc.
 ➢ External and Internal Criticism

The two types of criticism for acquiring sources are external and internal criticism.
When we say External Criticism it pertains to a style of criticism wherein it is questioning
the validity and authenticity of the source. It focuses on the main parts of the source
such as the date published, author, correlation of the topic to the content, etc. While the
Internal criticism, it is being done right after the external criticism wherein the
authenticity of the source is already checked. This criticism focuses more on the content
of the source such as identifying whether the source is primary or secondary, if the
author is having biases, literal meaning of the context, etc.

➢ Repositories of Primary Sources

When we say repositories of primary sources, these are actually places or sites that
we can find a huge amount of primary sources. In the internet, there are almost 5,000
different primary sources’ links like manuscripts, personal narratives, speeches, and
other primary sources; all of the links of these sources were already checked in
terms of authenticity and accuracy; it is also protected and safe on the internet since it
is all in a scholar websites wherein no one can edit or change the information in the
sources.

➢ Different Kinds of Primary Sources

Actually there are different kinds of Primary Sources: Personal Documents,

Research studies, Original Documents, and Artificial works. Personal Documents
pertains to documents that are personal such as personal narratives, interviews,
firsthand stories, emails, diaries and novels. Research studies are documents that
was created or conducted by a researcher like theses, experiment results,
findings, etc. Original Documents are simply the documents that are original such as
original manuscript, maps, government documents, etc. Lastly, Artificial works pertains
to an original work of the creator something like paintings, photograph,
sketch, and many more.

➢ Content and Contextual Analysis of selected primary sources

To be able to have a good analysis of the content and context of primary sources; one
should be critical enough, examine the source carefully and dig for deeper
understandings about the context and content of the source because sometimes there are
hidden meaning and messages behind the context. It is also advisable to dissect carefully
the information in the source and make some annotations to be able to draw a good
conclusion and analysis about it since there are different kinds of primary sources

and also there are different approaches with each one of it. Some of the
Philippine

History’s primary sources are Antonio Pigafetta’s “First Voyage around the world”, 1898

Declaration of Philippine Independence, etc. (Cordero, 2018).

➢ Identification of the historical importance of the text

Historical Significance can be identified in various events, issues, developments

in the past. Historians actually made different sets of criteria which can help
their judgment to identify the historical significance in the text. One of the basis
on the identification of historical importance of the text; is that when a certain event
or issue in the past had a huge impact and still affects the present, it is considered a
historical significance.

➢ Examination of the author’s main argument and point of view

In every text that we encounter, there is always a main argument of the author, as
well as his/her point of view about a certain topic, event, or issue. To be
able to examine and identify the author’s main argument and point of view; the text
should first be analysed and dissected by the reader. When it is already analysed by
the reader, then we can move on to the examining of the author’s main argument
and point of view. Some things are very vital when it comes to examining the
main argument and point of view of the author such as evidences provided to
support the main argument, conclusions made, assumptions presented, validity of
the claims, and authenticity of the data presented. These things should be able to be
critically examine by the reader to be able understand better the stand of the author
on a certain event, issue, etc.

➢ Theoretical Perspective on History

 There are different types of theories on history based on the Greeks: The great God
theory, the great man theory, The great mind theory, The best people theory, The
human nature theory.

The Great God Theory is a theory wherein history is all about the creation of the
world. In this theory, God created the world within six days and it influenced religions
such as Christianity. So, this theory does not have any scientific basis and just focusing
on the history of when God created the world within six days.

The Great Man Theory is a theory wherein history is all about mankind. In this
theory, all of the happenings that are considered a history were all about the human race
wherein

all of the known people of history are being recognized in this theory. For example: the
lawgiver (Solon), the military conqueror (Alexander), the dictator (Caesar), the
hero- emancipator (David), and the religious leader (Christ, Buddha, Mohammed).
(Novack, nd).

The Great Mind Theory is a theory wherein the mind is the one and only
motive principle of history. In this theory, the human mind is the one who
triggers human advancement through time. So basically, this theory is stating that
history is a set of products of the human mind.

The Best People Theory is a theory wherein the best race, elites, the ruling class,
and the superior nation alone make history. In this theory, history is made by the
superior nations alone. For example; Greek people regarded themselves as the acme of
culture and superior than Babylonians.

The Human Nature Theory is a theory wherein history is determined by the human
nature. Human nature is rigid from one generation to another. Historians were tasked to
demonstrate the relevance of these human traits and how history exemplified it.

➢ Functions of other social science disciplines to understand

historical events

Political Science
 It helps history to understand the different nature of the fundamental
political principles and basic form of political institution such as rules, regulations,
rights and duties, law and mode of justice, etc.

Economics

It is one of the social sciences that are a big help to the understanding of history
at different period since most of the activities of humans involves the economy. During
the last years, economies has been a difficult matter to humans because of lack
of knowledge; but as time goes by humans acquire a great amount of knowledge about
it; and it helps to understand better the history.

Statistics

In the modern world, the writing of the history is highly influenced by the use of statistical
data and through the invention of computers, the collection of these statistical data has
become possible. The use of these statistical data helped the presentation and
preservation of history in the modern times.

Sociology

History and Sociology is actually closely related with each other since both of
them are concerned with the study of human but just have a different approach.
Sociology helps history in terms of the synthesis that they produced about humans. It
also helps history about the “social dynamic”, wherein these are social changes
which help the field of history.

Psychology

It helps history to understand better the past events, issues, and happenings. For
example, historians used the influence of psychology to study and understand the
impacts and effects of war to humans.
 THE TABON CAVES OF PALAWAN
  The earliest evidence of man, himself, in the Philippines: which is also the earliest appearance of
modern man – Homo sapiens sapiens – in these islands, is that of the Tabon Man of Palawan. The
discovery of the human fossil was made by a National Museum team headed by the late Dr. Robert
B. Fox. The fossil is composed of the skull cap, or the frontal skull bone, two fragments of jaw
bones and some teeth. The set of fossils suggest that are at least three individuals. The skull cap is
that of a young individual, probably female.

      The fossils were found in a cave in Lipuun Point in the municipality of Quezon, Palawan. The
cave faces the South China Sea and is located on the western face of the limestone cliff, one among
the more than thirty caves found in that rock outcropping. The cave was named Tabon after the
large-footed bird that lays eggs in huge holes it digs into cave floors, many of which have been
found in the cave. The mouth is about 33 meters above the sea level. A curious fact is that there is
no signs of any sea shells in the cave floor deposits. This is because during that time of occupation
by Tabon Man the sea coast was about thirty kilometers away since the sea did not reach its present
level until about eleven to seven thousand years ago. The layer where the fossils of the Tabon Man
was found has been dated to 22 to 23 thousand years old, which also gives the age of the fossils.

      The Tabon Cave, in fact, was populated by peoples earlier than Tabon Man, since stone tools
were there again to prove this. The deepest soil deposit of the cave was dated to aprroximately
50,000 years old, and the youngest to about 10,000 years. This shows that the cave was used
continuously for about 40,000 years by peoples that used the same kind of tools. The earliest
carbon 14 date obtained for the Tabon Cave was about 30,000 years B.C. from charcoal sample,
which among others suggest the earliest date for the use of the fire in the Philippines. The way the
tools were made was exactly the same as those found in the Cagayan Valley about 700,000 years
earlier: the smaller flake tools and the larger pebble-cobble tools. There was however, one
difference. In Cagayan Valley, there were more of the large kinds of stone tools. In the Tabon
Cave, there was less than one percent of the pebble-cobble tools compared to the flake tools. This
has been taken to mean that the larger number of large stone tools in Cagayan was due to the
different needs in that place as compared to Palawan. In the Tabon Caves, the archeological
remains tend to show that the early peoples here were catching more of small animals, bats and
birds that live in the cave itself, hence there was less need for larger kinds of tools.

      The type of tools found in the Tabon Cave actually continued to be in use in other sites in the
Lipuun Point even after Tabon Cave was abandoned. In fact, this type of tools continued to be in
use even to recent times among certain peoples. There are a number of archeological sites in the
Philippines that have this kind of tools together with tools of later kind. In Lipuun Point, one of the
more important of these sites is the Guri Cave. This cave was a place where people lived. This cave
contained a layer of soil that contained the garbage left by the people which was composed mostly
of marine shells. This layer was dated between 5000 and 2000 years B.C., and was found to contain
flake tools, bones of animals like the wild pig, deer and others. This cave was used by people at the
time when the sea reached its present level which brought the coastline right at Lipuun Point.

      Another difference with Tabon Cave was that the stone tools from Guri were made from rock
cores that have been previously prepared before flaking off an intended tool, which produced stone
tools with shapes that are repeated – a method that cannot be done with cores that were not
prepared.
 INTRAMUROS, THE WALLED CITY

Without any stone buildings or walls to protect it, the new city was vulnerable to foreign attacks.
For instance, in 1574, the Chinese pirate Limahong attacked and destroyed Manila before the
settlers could drive them off. Those who survived the attack had to rebuild the colony.
[12]
 Furthermore, fire posed a serious danger to Manila; a serious fire in 1583 practically burned
the whole city to the ground. In 1587, to protect Manila, Captain-General Santiago de Vera
ordered that all further structures be made of stone, and that nipa and bamboo be replaced with
roof tile and brick. As a result, bahay na bato (“house of stone”) were built all over Manila.
[13]
 The the construction of the stone Fort Santiago, named after the Spanish military’s patron
saint James, was ordered built on August 9, 1589.[14]

Intram
uros as seen from Manila Bay, circa 1800s. (Photo courtesy of Intramuros Administration)

The walls began construction in 1589 under the tenure of Governor-General Gomez Perez
Dasmariñas. Chinese and Filipino workers built the walls of adobe stone while Spanish military
engineer and fortification specialist Leornardo Iturriano oversaw the construction. The project
was funded by money from a monopoly on playing cards and fines imposed for excessive
gaming. It took more than a century to complete the walls. By the eighteenth century, Manila
was completely enclosed in walls, hence its name Intramuros (“within the walls” in Latin).[15]

Intramuros became the capital of the Spanish East Indies (Indias orientales españolas), which
included the Philippines, Guam, Palau, and the Marianas. The Walled City became the center of
political and ecclesiastical power, with the Palacio del Gobernador, the Ayuntamiento and the
Manila Cathedral dominating. Initially, only Spaniards were allowed to live in Intramuros while
everyone else—Filipinos, Chinese, and other foreigners—lived in the
surrounding arrabales (suburbs), like Binondo, San Miguel, and Santa Ana. Non-Spaniards who
worked in Intramuros entered the city at dawn and left before midnight when the city gates
closed. However, by the latter half of the 18th century, the segregation scheme was abandoned.
To escape the heat, wealthy Spaniards moved out of Intramuros to the riverside and bayside
suburbs. One such Spaniard was Lúis Rocha, who in the 1750s built his country house in the San
Miguel district on the property that would later become the site of Malacañan Palace.
[16]
 Intramuros was no longer a purely Spanish city; In 1794, it had a population of 1,456 Spanish
or Spanish mestizos, 7,253 Filipinos, and 1,075 Chinese mestizos.[17]

CAPTION: Plaza Mayor (now Plaza de Roma) in Intramuros in 1851. Palacio del Gobernador, the official residence of the Spanish Governor-General, is seen on the
right, while the Manila Cathedral is seen at the center, as left is the Ayuntamiento. From this plaza emanated the political power of Spain over the islands. (Photo
courtesy of the Presidential Museum and Library)

Intramuros was also the Asian outpost of the galleon trade: raw materials like wood, gold, and
wax were loaded onto galleons bound for Acapulco, while Mexican silver passed back and forth.
Ships docked in Manila Bay and Cavite brought goods imported from China and other Asian
ports. These goods were unloaded and delivered on barges to the Aduana (customs house, later
known as the Intendencia) at the mouth of the Pasig River.[18]

As the Spaniards expanded their colonization, the Walled City became part of a large province
that encompassed the surrounding arrabales (suburbs), known as extramuros, and 28 other
towns, some of which are modern cities in today’s Metropolitan Manila. [19] The province would
be known as the Provincia de Manila. Its boundary to the north was the province of Bulacan; to
the east, the district of Morong and Laguna de Bay; to the south, the provinces of Laguna and
Cavite, and to the West is the Manila Bay.[20]

CAPTION: Sketch of Manila and its suburbs, by Emilio Godínez and Juan Álvarez Arenas, c. 19th century.

In 1762, two years into the war between the United Kingdom and the Spanish Empire, a fleet
dispatched by the British East India Company from India sailed toward Southeast Asia to
conquer colonies under the Spanish crown. The fleet was under the command of Rear-Admiral
Samuel Cornish and Brigadier General William Draper, and its land forces were comprised of
regiments of British soldiers, Royal Artillery, and Indian Sepoys. The “little army,” as Brig. Gen.
Draper described it in his journal, arrived in the Philippine Archipelago on September 23,
1762. After a month-long siege, Manila, capital of the colony, was finally conquered by the
British, beginning a two-year period of British rule. [21] This was the first time the Spaniards had
been ousted from their Asian outpost by a contending power. [22] The British occupation would
extend north, incorporating Bulacan, Pampanga, and parts of Ilocos. It would last for two years.
The signing of the 1763 Treaty of Paris ended the Seven Years’ War between the British and the
Spanish. However, it was only a year later that Manila and the surrounding provinces held by the
British, were turned over to the Spanish Governor-General Simón de Anda y Salazar.
 MANILA MAPS OF SPANISH EARLY SETTLEMENT: INTRAMUROS – A GRIDDED
FORTIFIED TOWN

Early Development of Intramuros © 1978 in Colonial Manila : the context of Hispanic

urbanism and process of morphogenesis by Robert R. Reed
 Historic Map of Manila©1650, as reprinted in Maps and Views of Old Manila by Carlos
Quirino

The Americans started ruling Manila from 1898. And before then it was the Spanish who had
governed the place from 1571 to 1898. It is important to understand the pre-American colonial
period city planning in Manila as a background of Daniel Burnham’s scheme since the latter
made many decisions based on the original conditions. Here the series of maps show the Spanish
early settlement. The incremental changes reveal the strategy of a fortified town that physically
provides protection from outside interference and symbolically signifies the seemingly enduring
colonial power.

First what appeared on the map was the imposed grid featuring a cathedral with a plaza, which
immediately created a sense of control and divinity that the Spanish intended to build up. From
1576 to 1650, it can be seen that a complete system of fortification which frames the intramuros
– the inner city had been gradually established. There is the continuous wall system that
surrounds the intramuros, the moat system that further defends the protective walls and finally
the forts which was initially made of wood and later changed to stone due to its fire-resistance.
Only Spaniards were allowed to live in the intramuros and all the civic
services including government buildings, hospitals, schools and churches were all built within
the wall.  There was a strong segregation of ethnic groups within the colonial society.

It is interesting to see that in the detailed map of 1650, all these institutional and religious
buildings were built near the periphery instead of a centralized position. One clue may be drawn
from is the Colonial Town Planning Ordinance by Philip II in 1573, in which it required that the
main church be situated in a way that is “visible from the landing place so that its structure may
serve as means of defense”, and that the purpose of settlement is to “teach them to live in a
civilized way” and “to know God and His Law”(PhilipII, 1573).  Therefore the peripheral
locational meanings could be twofold. It served firstly as a physical defense and secondly a
propaganda device to impress and “civilize” the natives, both of which reflects the identity of the
colonial capital as an exclusive and highly enclosed fortified town radiating out power and
control in the Spanish period.
 THE TWO FACES OF THE 1872 CAVITE MUTINY
by Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay

      The 12th of June of every year since 1898 is a very important event for all the Filipinos.   In
this particular day, the entire Filipino nation as well as Filipino communities all over the world
gathers to celebrate the Philippines’ Independence Day.  1898 came to be a very significant year
for all of us— it is as equally important as 1896—the year when the Philippine Revolution broke
out owing to the Filipinos’ desire to be free from the abuses of the Spanish colonial regime.  But
we should be reminded that another year is as historic as the two—1872.

       Two major events happened in 1872, first was the 1872 Cavite Mutiny and the other was the
martyrdom of the three martyr priests in the persons of Fathers Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos and
Jacinto Zamora (GOMBURZA).  However, not all of us knew that there were different accounts
in reference to the said event.  All Filipinos must know the different sides of the story—since this
event led to another tragic yet meaningful part of our history—the execution of GOMBURZA
which in effect a major factor in the awakening of nationalism among the Filipinos.

1872 Cavite Mutiny: Spanish Perspective

       Jose Montero y Vidal, a prolific Spanish historian documented the event and highlighted it
as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. Meanwhile,
Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdo’s official report magnified the event and made use of it to implicate
the native clergy, which was then active in the call for secularization.  The two accounts
complimented and corroborated with one other, only that the general’s report was more spiteful.
Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the
workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of tributes and exemption from force labor were
the main reasons of the “revolution” as how they called it, however, other causes were
enumerated by them including the Spanish Revolution which overthrew the secular throne, dirty
propagandas proliferated by unrestrained press, democratic, liberal and republican books and
pamphlets reaching the Philippines, and most importantly, the presence of the native clergy who
out of animosity against the Spanish friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels and enemies of
Spain.  In particular, Izquierdo blamed the unruly Spanish Press for “stockpiling” malicious
propagandas grasped by the Filipinos.  He reported to the King of Spain that the “rebels” wanted
to overthrow the Spanish government to install a new “hari” in the likes of Fathers Burgos and
Zamora.  The general even added that the native clergy enticed other participants by giving them
charismatic assurance that their fight will not fail because God is with them coupled with
handsome promises of rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks in the army.  Izquierdo,
in his report lambasted the Indios as gullible and possessed an innate propensity for stealing.

       The two Spaniards deemed that the event of 1872 was planned earlier and was thought of it
as a big conspiracy among educated leaders, mestizos, abogadillos or native lawyers, residents of
Manila and Cavite and the native clergy.  They insinuated that the conspirators of Manila and
Cavite planned to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers to be followed by the massacre of the
friars.  The alleged pre-concerted signal among the conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the
firing of rockets from the walls of Intramuros.

     According to the accounts of the two, on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated
the feast of the Virgin of Loreto, unfortunately participants to the feast celebrated the occasion
with the usual fireworks displays.  Allegedly, those in Cavite mistook the fireworks as the sign
for the attack, and just like what was agreed upon, the 200-men contingent headed by Sergeant
Lamadrid launched an attack targeting Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal.

       When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov. Izquierdo, he readily ordered the reinforcement
of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt.  The “revolution” was easily crushed when the
expected reinforcement from Manila did not come ashore.  Major instigators including Sergeant
Lamadrid were killed in the skirmish, while the GOMBURZA were tried by a court-martial and
were sentenced to die by strangulation.  Patriots like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma.
Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and other abogadillos were suspended by the Audencia (High Court)
from the practice of law, arrested and were sentenced with life imprisonment at the Marianas
Island.  Furthermore, Gov. Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of artillery and ordered the
creation of artillery force to be composed exclusively of the Peninsulares.

        On 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish government and Frailocracia to instill

fear among the Filipinos so that they may never commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA
were executed.  This event was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino
nationalism.

A Response to Injustice: The Filipino Version of the Incident

        Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher, wrote the
Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite.  In his point of view, the incident was a mere
mutiny by the native Filipino soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal who turned out to be
dissatisfied with the abolition of their privileges.  Indirectly, Tavera blamed Gov. Izquierdo’s
cold-blooded policies such as the abolition of privileges of the workers and native army members
of the arsenal and the prohibition of the founding of school of arts and trades for the Filipinos,
which the general believed as a cover-up for the organization of a political club.

       On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, laborers of the arsenal, and
residents of Cavite headed by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms and assassinated the commanding
officer and Spanish officers in sight.  The insurgents were expecting support from the bulk of the
army unfortunately, that didn’t happen.  The news about the mutiny reached authorities in
Manila and Gen. Izquierdo immediately ordered the reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite. 
After two days, the mutiny was officially declared subdued.

      Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a powerful
lever by magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also
included residents of Cavite and Manila, and more importantly the native clergy to overthrow the
Spanish government in the Philippines.  It is noteworthy that during the time, the Central
Government in Madrid announced its intention to deprive the friars of all the powers of
intervention in matters of civil government and the direction and management of educational
institutions.  This turnout of events was believed by Tavera, prompted the friars to do something
drastic in their dire sedire to maintain power in the Philippines.

       Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the Central Government of Spain

welcomed an educational decree authored by Segismundo Moret promoted the fusion of
sectarian schools run by the friars into a school called Philippine Institute.  The decree proposed
to improve the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in such
schools to be filled by competitive examinations. This improvement was warmly received by
most Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s zest for secularization.

       The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines would be a thing of the past, took
advantage of the incident and presented it to the Spanish Government as a vast conspiracy
organized throughout the archipelago with the object of destroying Spanish sovereignty. Tavera
sadly confirmed that the Madrid government came to believe that the scheme was true without
any attempt to investigate the real facts or extent of the alleged “revolution” reported by
Izquierdo and the friars.

       Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were sentenced life imprisonment
while members of the native clergy headed by the GOMBURZA were tried and executed by
garrote.  This episode leads to the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of
Philippine Revolution of 1896.  The French writer Edmund Plauchut’s account complimented
Tavera’s account by confirming that the event happened due to discontentment of the arsenal
workers and soldiers in Cavite fort.  The Frenchman, however, dwelt more on the execution of
the three martyr priests which he actually witnessed.

Unraveling the Truth

       Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were some basic facts that remained
to be unvarying: First, there was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as well as the
members of the native army after their privileges were drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo; Second,
Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid and strict policies that made the Filipinos move and turn away
from Spanish government out of disgust; Third, the Central Government failed to conduct an
investigation on what truly transpired but relied on reports of Izquierdo and the friars and the
opinion of the public; Fourth, the happy days of the friars were already numbered in 1872 when
the Central Government in Spain decided to deprive them of the power to intervene in
government affairs as well as in the direction and management of schools prompting them to
commit frantic moves to extend their stay and power; Fifth,  the Filipino clergy members
actively participated in the secularization movement in order to  allow Filipino priests to take
hold of the parishes in the country making them prey to the rage of the friars; Sixth, Filipinos
during the time were active participants, and responded to what they deemed as injustices; and
Lastly, the execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish government, for
the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired Filipino patriots to call
for reforms and eventually independence.  There may be different versions of the event, but one
thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny paved way for a momentous 1898.

        The road to independence was rough and tough to toddle, many patriots named and
unnamed shed their bloods to attain reforms and achieve independence.  12 June 1898 may be a
glorious event for us, but we should not forget that before we came across to victory, our
forefathers suffered enough.  As we enjoy our freedom, may we be more historically aware of
our past to have a better future ahead of us.  And just like what Elias said in Noli me Tangere,
may we “not forget those who fell during the night.”
 How the Death of GomBurZa led to A Wholly Filipino Church
Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora solidified the secularization movement and the nascent
nationalism felt by so many.

On February 17, 1872, three priests—Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto

Zamora—were killed in Bagumbayan on charges of leading a mutiny of arsenal
workers in Cavite with the aim of overthrowing the colonial government.
The three priests were not involved in the mutiny; they hardly even knew each other.
What they were, however, were prominent figures in the secularization movement,
which wanted to take Church power away from the colonial Spanish and give native
Filipinos increased roles in Church affairs.

The Power of the Church Over the State

Colonial Philippines was a completely feudal society, with its institutions propped up
to serve the land-owning class of Spanish peninsulares and the friars. The Catholic
Church was no exception; in some cases, the Church was even the deciding factor.
The Church was a nexus of power, culture, politics, and ultimately, economy. In early
colonial Philippines, land was distributed among church orders like the Jesuits or the
Dominicans for them to use as they saw fit. This gave the Church sweeping power in
the colonial government.
It also gave them control over the regular Filipino. Religion became an integral part of
Filipino society in all aspects, from Church service to a healthy fear of God in Heaven
and consequently, a fear of the old traditions as demonic and unknown.

Most important, it gave the Church amazing economic power. Churches reaped
massive profits in the form of tithes from church-goers and by exploiting farmers and
the land they tilled. Being assigned to a “good” church like the Antipolo Shrine or
Quiapo meant you’d be set for life.
This started to unravel in the 1780s as secular priests, priests not under any religious
order, began to emerge and were assigned churches. The regulars, priests from the
established orders, naturally protested. 
Their reasons were mostly racist—they were Filipinos, and they were unfit to serve as
priests. But the underlying motivation was purely economic—more Filipino priests
controlling key churches would shake the established status quo or, worse, they could
lead a rebellion just like in Mexico or Peru.
The fight for secularization picked up in the 19th century, as the idea of liberalism—
that all men were equal and had equal right to opportunity and property—washed over
Europe and her colonies. More and more secular priests clamored for rights within the
Church, while the established colonial and religious government looked on in fear.
Cue the perfect opportunity. In 1872, dockworkers in the Cavite arsenal clamored for
better pay and attempted a mutiny, but was crushed overnight. The facts of the case
were unclear, but during the trial, three names were singled out—the secular priests
Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora.

Mariano Gomez, the Old Veteran

Contrary to the pictures depicting him as a younger man, Gomez was already 72 when
he sentenced to die. He was an ilustrado to the core, with his nephew, Dominador,
eventually becoming an influential figure in the labor movement. 
In his younger years, he was just as militant, fighting for the rights of the secular
clergy and agrarian reform, which made him a wholly unpopular figure among the
Spanish landed elite. In 1822, he launched a campaign to provide amnesty for Cavite
peasants who were forced to take up arms. He was an old liberal, through and through,
riding the crest of the liberal wave of the early 19th century.
But the events of the Novales revolt and its aftermath led Gomez to lie low and accept
the status quo. By 1872, he was an old man, weary and resigned that little will change
in his lifetime.

Jacinto Zamora, the Victim of False Identity

Unlike Gomez or Burgos, Jacinto Zamora was not an exemplary priest. He was
anything but—he had a habit of playing cards during mass. While the others could be
said to have died for some sort of conviction, Zamora was a gambling priest who had
little care in the world.
One day in 1872, he received a letter that one of his gambler friends had “bullets and
gunpowder”—code for a lot of cash. That note fell into Spanish authorities and
branded him as the one thing they feared the most: a native priest trying to start a
revolution.
The cards fell badly for Zamora soon after. An unrelated arrest warrant for another
Jose Zamora was given to him and he died in the man’s place. He was 36 at the time.

Pedro Burgos, the ‘King of the Filipinos’

Burgos has been described as a “precursor to Rizal,” the type of secular priest who
really clamored for Filipino rights. As a student, he was said to have incited a
demonstration that ended in violence when the Letran administration tried to curb
students’ rights and imposed its candidate in student council elections.
As a priest, he co-headed a reform committee and was keen on seeing Filipinos taking
up more positions in the Church. He saw the Philippine Church as rightfully
belonging to the Filipinos—by that he meant the insulares, Spaniards born in the
Philippines.
But it was that budding nationalism that made him dangerous. In the eyes of the
Spanish elite, he was a young upstart trying to upend the established system. That’s
why in 1872, he was implicated in the Cavite mutiny—the mutineers were calling out
for Burgos, proclaiming him “Rey indio,” native King. He was 35 when he was
sentenced to die.

How the Death of Gomburza Influenced History

In the end, the three priests were killed in Bagumbayan (now Rizal Park) by garrote,
and they were buried in Paco Park in unmarked graves. Their deaths were by no
means small events at the time. The ilustrado class was furious and demanded an
explanation and reforms.
Twenty years later, during the 1890s, a new crop of ilustrados would take inspiration
from the deaths of Gomburza. One of them, a man named Jose Rizal, would write his
novel, Noli Me Tangere, and dedicate it to the trio.
The death of Gomburza solidified the nascent nationalism felt by so many. The
concept of “Filipino” and what is “Philippine” only grew from there. Besides Rizal,
the Katipunan also grew emboldened by the liberal ideas which propelled their
inadvertent martyrdom, even going so far as using Gomburza as a password.
Ultimately, the secularization movement would grow into a call for a wholly Filipino
church. During the Revolution of 1896, two men, Isabelo de los Reyes and Fr.
Gregorio Aglipay, would make that dream a reality and create a church that was truly
Filipino, the Iglesia Filipina Independiente.

Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora didn’t necessarily die fighting for a cause they
championed. But the cause they did die for managed to change our history and create
a Filipino identity as we understand it today.
THE WORKS OF LUNA AND AMORSOLO
Fernando Amorsolo y Cueto “Grand Old Man of Philippine
Art”

Amorsolo (1892 - 1972) was a portrait artist and a painter of

rural landscapes. Fernando Amorsolo was born on May 30, 1892,
in Paco Manila. At the age of thirteen, he became an apprentice
to the noted Philippine artist Fabian de la Rosa, his mother’s
cousin. In 1914, he graduated fine-arts from the University of the
Philippines. He studied at the Escuela de San Fernando in Madrid after working as a
commercial artist and part-time instructor in UP. During his time in Madrid, he sketched
museums and street views, experimenting the use of light and color. He went to New
York in winter and discovered the works of the postwar impressionists and cubists who
became major influences on his work.

He set up his studio in Manila and developed the use of light – backlight – which
is his greatest contribution to Philippine painting. He was well known of his paintings
about the Philippine’s ‘Buhay sa bukid'. Unlike his popularity in this generation, he
became controversial because of his paintings. It was said that his paintings did not
depict the true life of the Filipinos because his painting were to idealistic and people
were very happy, colourful and clean which as we know is not the true life of ‘bukirin’

It was also said that Amorsolo was commercial; he sells the photos of his
paintings and let the client choose what they wanted. The quality of work was based on
how much you can pay that’s why there’s a lot of version of his work. Because of this,
he had a lot of regular customers such as the Araleta, Don Vargaz, and even the young
Ninoy Aquino commissioned them to paint a portrait of Corazon Coanco.

Amorsolo, who died in April 24, 1972 of heart attack, is said to have painted more
than 10,000 pieces. He continued to paint even in his late 70’s despite arthritis in his
hands. Even his late works feature the classic Amorsolo tropical sunlight. He said he
hated “sad and gloomy” paintings, and he executed only one painting in which rain
appeared. Four days after his death, President Marcos granted him the first National
Artist for Visual Arts

1. Women and landscapes

Amorsolo is excellent regarded for his illuminated landscapes, which frequently

portrayed conventional Filipino customs, culture, fiestas and occupations. His pastoral
works presented "an imagined experience of nationhood in counterpoint to American
colonial rule" and were vital to the formation of Filipino countrywide identity. He changed
into educated within the classical subculture and aimed "to achieve his Philippine model
of the Greek ideal for the human form." In his art work of Filipina women, Amorsolo
rejected Western beliefs of splendor in prefer of Filipino beliefs and turned into keen on
basing the faces of his topics on participants of his family.

Palay Maiden (1920)

“My conception of an ideal Filipina beauty is one with a

rounded face, not of the oval type... The eyes should be
exceptionally lively… The nose should be of the blunt form but
firm and strongly marked… The ideal Filipino beauty should have
a sensuous mouth…not…white-complexioned, nor of the dark
brown color…but of the clear skin…which we often witness when
we meet a blushing girl.”

For Amorsolo, the Filipino beauty become a vital symbol of country wide identity.
The colors of the Philippine flag are evident in the blue kerchief, pink skirt, and white
blouse. The challenge gazes directly at the viewer, retaining a generous package deal
of newly harvested rice, a hope-stuffed second for the younger Philippines.

Landscape (1951)

In this 1951 Amorsolo painting, the mountains can

effortlessly be identified, from left to right: Mt. Atimla,
Mt. Kalisungan, Mt. Banahaw de Lucban, Mt. Banahaw,
and Mt. Cristobal. Amazingly, he turned into depicting the scene precisely as it is able to
be viewed from Los Baños.

2. Sketches

Reading a letter (1933)

Amorsolo turned into an incessant comic strip artist,

often drawing sketches at his home, at Luneta Park, and
inside the countryside. He drew the human beings he saw
round him, from farmers to city-dwellers managing the
Japanese occupation. Amorsolo's impressionistic
tendencies, which can be visible in his paintings as well,
were at their height in his sketches. His figures have been
not completely finished however have been mere
"suggestions" of the image.

3. Historical paintings and portraits

The making of the Philippine Flag

The making of Philippine flag is a

masterpiece painting by Fernando
Amorsolo in Philippines. Fernando
Amorsolo was one of the most important
artists in the history of painting in the
Philippines. No doubt he created such a
wonderful artwork. The painting shows
three women namely Marcella Marino de
Agoncillo (on the right side) refer as the mother of the Philippine flag, with the help of
Lorenza and Delfina Herbosa de Natividad which is actually the daughter of Marcela.
They were tasked by Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo to sew the first flag for the new republic.
 Amorsolo additionally painted a sequence of historical paintings on pre-Colonial
and Spanish Colonization events. Amorsolo's Making of the Philippine Flag, in
particular, turned into broadly reproduced. His The First Baptism inside the Philippines
required severa designated sketches and colored research of its factors. These diverse
elements have been meticulously and thoroughly set through the artist before being
transferred to the very last canvas. For his pre-colonial and 16th-century depiction of the
Philippines, Amorsolo referred to the written bills of Antonio Pigafetta, different to be
had reading materials, and visual sources He consulted with the Philippine students of
the time, H. Pardo de Tavera and Epifanio de los Santos.

Amorsolo also painted oil pics of Presidents like General Emilio Aguinaldo, and
other prominent individuals including Don Alfredo Jacób and Doña Pura Garchitorena
Toral of Camarines Sur. He also painted the wedding photo of Don Mariano
Garchitorena and Doña Caridad Pamintuan of Pampanga.

He additionally did a portrait of American Senator Warren Grant Magnuson

(1905–1989), of the Democratic Party from Washington, whom the Warren G.
Magnuson Health Sciences Building on the University of Washington, and the Warren
G. Magnuson Clinical Center on the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland
are named after.

4. World War II-era works

Defense of a Filipina Woman's Honor

Here, a Filipino man defends a woman, who is either his wife or daughter,
from being raped by an unseen Japanese soldier. Note the Japanese military cap
at the man's foot.
After the onset of World War II, Amorsolo's normal pastoral scenes were
replaced via the depictions of a warfare-torn nation. During the Japanese
profession of the Philippines during World War II, Amorsolo spent his days at his
home near the Japanese garrison, wherein he sketched conflict scenes from the
house's home windows or rooftop.
 During the battle, he documented the destruction of many landmarks in Manila
and the pain, tragedy and demise experienced with the aid of Filipino humans, with his
subjects including "girls mourning their useless husbands, files of human beings with
pushcarts and makeshift bags leaving a dark burning metropolis tinged with pink from
fire and blood." Amorsolo regularly portrayed the lives and struggling of Filipina girls at
some stage in World War II. Other World War II-era art work by means of Amorsolo
include a portrait in absentia of General Douglas MacArthur in addition to self-photos
and paintings of Japanese profession soldiers. In 1948, Amorsolo's wartime paintings
had been exhibited on the Malacañang Presidential Palace.

Reference:

 Fernando Amorsolo Facts (n.d.) retrieved from

http://biography.yourdictionary.com/fernando-amorsolo
 Lane, J. (2014) Art Now and Then retrieved from
http://art-now-and-then.blogspot.com/2014/02/fernando-amorsolo.html
 Esteria, P. (2012) A small collection of Fernando Amorsolo's paintings retrieved
from
https://kahimyang.com/kauswagan/articles/1372/a-small-collection-of-fernando-
amorsolos-paintings

Juan Luna de San Pedro y Novicio Ancheta

 Juan Luna de San Pedro y Novicio Ancheta, better known as Juan Luna, was a
Filipino painter, sculptor and a political activist of the Philippine Revolution during the
late 19th century. He became one of the first recognized Philippine artists.

Don Lorenzo Guerrero is the first mentor of Luna and recognized the young
man’s natural talent and persuaded his parents to send him to Spain for advanced
painting lessons. Luna left for Barcelona in 1877 and widened his knowledge of the art
and he was exposed to the immortal works of Renaissance masters. In 1878, he was
included in the first art exposition in Madrid, Exposicion Nacional de Bellas Artes
(National Demonstration of Beautiful Arts) which included his masterpieces; Spoliarium,
La Batalla de Lepanto (The Battle of Lepanto), El Pacto de Sangre (The Blood
Compact), Don Miguel de Legazpi and Governor Ramon Blanco. Despite this great
achievement, it became a controversy because he was the first indio who won such
prestigious award.

A fact that is not well known about Luna is that he is a Seaman before he
became a painter. He lived in Madrid and Paris before coming back to the Philippines in
1894.In 1898, he accompanied his brother Heneral Antonio Luna in the revolutionary
and designed the uniform of the revolutionary army. One of the first Filipino diplomat
and died serving the first republic of the Philippines because of an heart attack in Hong
Kong.
Works of Luna

 The Blood Compact - The Blood

Compact portrays the 1565 Sandugo (blood
compact ritual) between Datu
Sikatuna of Bohol and Miguel López de Legazpi,
surrounded by other conquistadors. Datu
Sikatuna was described to be 'being crowded out
of the picture by Miguel López de Legazpi and
his fellow conquistadores. Luna painted this
during his four – year pensionadoship from the Ayuntamiento de Manila, enabling
him to continue studying painting in Rome. It is one of the three painting Luna
gave to the government of Spain.

 España y Filipinas - España y Filipinas, meaning “Spain and

the Philippines” in translation, is an 1886 oil on wood by
Filipino painter, ilustrado, propagandist, and paladin, Juan
Luna. It is an allegorical depiction of two women together, one
a representation of Spain and the other of the Philippines.
The painting, also known as España Guiando a Filipinas, is
regarded as one of the “enduring pieces of legacy” that the
Filipinos inherited from Luna. The painting is a centerpiece art
at the Luna Hall of the Lopez Memorial Museum.  It is
a propaganda painting that revealed the true hope and desire
of Filipino propagandists during the 19th-century: assimilation
with Spain, reform, equality, modernization, and economic
improvement.

 Las Damas Romanas - Las Damas Romanas, also known as The Roman
Maidens, The Roman Women, or The Roman Ladies, is an oil on canvas
painting by Juan Luna, one of the most important Filipino painters of the Spanish
 period in the Philippines. It was painted by Luna when he was a student of the
school of painting in the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando in
Madrid, Spain in 1877. Alejo Valera, a Spanish painting teacher, took Luna as an
apprentice and brought him to Rome where Luna created Las Damas Romanas
in 1882. Luna spent six years in Rome from 1878 to 1884. It depicted a domestic
scene in ancient Roman life, portraying two women lying on the steps of a house.
The hand of one woman was holding the reins of two pet dogs or hunting
dogs, in order to prevent them from scaring away some doves. The doves
symbolized divinity. The background of the painting presented a shelf of artifacts.
To the left of the shelf was
a shrine with a pediment shaped
like a triangle. In front of the
pediment was a burner with a
smoking incense.

 Spolarium - The Spoliarium is a

painting by Filipino artist Juan
Luna. The painting was
submitted by Luna to the
Exposición Nacional de Bellas
Artes in 1884 in Madrid, where it
garnered the first gold medal. In
1886, it was sold to the Diputación Provincial de Barcelona for 20,000 pesetas. It
currently hangs in the main gallery at the ground floor of the National Museum of
the Philippines, and is the first work of art that greets visitors upon entry into the
museum. His Spoliarium was all about the bloodied bodies of gladiators, who
were drawn as slaves; and dragged away from the wide and powerful arena as
they attempted to fight their Roman oppressors, with their own precious and God
given lives. In addition, these slaves on this world-renowned painting of Juan
Luna were physically stripped of their clothing in order to gratify the lewd and
 devilish contempt of those Roman oppressors. Thus, this had excellently
embodied the essence of the political, moral and social lives of the Filipino,
based on the critical analysis of Dr. Jose Rizal, the national hero of the
Philippines; and a contemporary of Luna. According to the author of Noli Me
Tangere, the masterpiece of Juan Luna centered on the severe ordeal of the
Filipino nation, in which its encompassing human nature, had never been
regained.

 The Death of Cleopatra - The Death of Cleopatra, also known simply as

Cleopatra, is an 1881 painting made by
the Filipino painter Juan Luna. The
famous painting was a silver medalist or
second prize winner during the 1881
National Exposition of Fine Arts in
Madrid. The 1881 Madrid painting
contest was Luna's first art exposition.
Because of the exposure, Luna
received a pension scholarship at the Ayuntamiento de Manila. After the painting
competition, Luna sold it for 5,000 Spanish pesetas, the highest price for a
painting at the time. As Luna's "graduation work", The Death of Cleopatra was
acquired by the Spanish government for one thousand duros. "The subject of the
painting," he wrote, "is the death of that queen of Egypt whom Horace called the
fatal monster, and Virgil a cursed woman; that one which Michelet said does not
deserve mercy or admiration. .. In golden bed lies the corpse of Cleopatra,
adorned with pharaonic magnificence; the slave Iras, also dead, is in front of the
bed; the black slave Charmion, who has just placed the royal crown on her lady's
head, falling at that moment, as if struck by lightning." The venomous asp had
just done its job.