Rizal Issues a Manifesto to Proclaim his

Innocence
Posted on September 19, 2012

RIZAL ISSUES A MANIFESTO TO PROCLAIM HIS INNOCENCE

By Christian Bernard A. Melendez

      As 2011 draws to a close, we look back at a milestone year for a celebrated patriot– Jose Rizal and his 150th birth anniversary.
Although his death anniversary brings a pall to the celebrations, it is his selfless sacrifice which continues to reverberate in the
consciousness of every Filipino.

    However, much as Rizal’s judgment may seem to be harsh and unjust, it was an expected verdict since Spain was facing a difficult
time in quelling the revolution in Cuba, ill affording to have another rebellion in her colony in the Orient. The easy way out, the Spanish
colonial authorities must have presumed, was to snuff out swiftly the leading voice of reform, and Rizal was the perfect fall guy. In their
zealousness to hold him accountable, they even imprisoned Paciano and mercilessly tortured him to implicate his younger brother.

     It was a veritable open-and-shut case: Rizal inspired the revolution through his writings and the insurgents were his henchmen
carrying out his call for freedom. Did he not establish an illegal association called the Liga Filipina,1 which was a precursor to the
Katipunan? One wonders how Rizal would have acted when the verdict was read—was he impassive, maintaining the august air of a
gentleman patriot? To hear out Judge Advocate General Nicolas de la Peña’s thundering statement that: “Rizal has therefore been well
and truly identified as the prime mover of the consummated crime of rebellion by means of the crime of illegal association. The
sentence passed on him is just, and may lawfully be confirmed on its own merits.”2 Musketry seemed to be an apt death sentence to a
traitor.

      The verdict aimed as well to cripple Rizal’s finances by asking him to indemnify the state by paying “the amount of one hundred
thousand pesos (100,000 pesos)…and should be paid by his heirs in case he cannot pay it in his lifetime.”3
 
    But did Rizal inspire the Philippine Revolution? Of the numerous preserved notes and letters of Rizal, one intriguing document was
his Manifesto a Algunos Filipinos (Manifesto to Certain Filipinos) written on December 15, 1896 during his incarceration in Fort
Santiago.

    The manifesto, which tried to convince Filipinos to end the revolt, had five points. First, he absolved himself by declaring that he was
never a part of the revolution; his name was used to attract Filipinos to join the revolution. Second, he was consulted about the planned
revolution but he advised the perpetrators to abandon it. Third, he wanted to stop the rebellion by offering his services to the people.
Fourth, he condemned the revolution as ridiculous and barbarous. Fifth, uprising was not an option at that time, that reforms should
be the authorities’ initiative, not the citizens’. He made it clear that the people’s education is potent in inducing changes in society.    

    The manifesto is an illuminating statement of Rizal’s raison d’être–as stipulated in the “Noli me tangere” and “El
Filibusterismo.” Although Rizal loathed the abusive practices of the friars and colonial government, he never advocated for an abrupt
and chaotic approach to independence. He believed that the Filipinos’ enlightenment was crucial: “I have given proofs as one who
most wants liberties for our country and I continue wanting them. But I put as a promise the education of the people so that through
education and work, they might have a personality of their own and make themselves worthy of them. In my writings, I have
recommended study, civic virtues, without which redemption is impossible.”4

    Unfortunately, the manifesto was never made public. It was not enough to convince his accusers of his innocence and acquit him of
the charges. According to Judge Advocate General de la Peña: “Dr. Jose Rizal limits himself to criticizing the present insurrectionary
movement as premature.” He also noted that “as far as Rizal is concerned, the whole question is one of opportunity, not of principles
and objectives.” Finally, de la Peña reasoned out that “a message of this sort, far from promoting peace, is likely to stimulate for the
future the spirit of rebellion.”5

    Rizal knew that his life was at an end, but he was satisfied that he stood up for his principles and that the seed sown would bear fruit
in the heroes after him. “Patriotism… is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a
lifetime.” This is what Rizal wanted us to understand — that we can change and improve ourselves through a circumspect
understanding of life’s benefits and pitfalls, instead of engaging in flaring emotions and disregard for consequences.

    Rizal, as always, is the greatest Filipino of all time.

—————————–
1 Horacio de la Costa, The Trial of Rizal, W. E. Retana’s
Transcription of the Official Spanish Documents, edited and translated,
with notes (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1996) 160.
2 De la Costa 160
3 De la Costa 156-157
4 Jose Rizal, Political and Historical Writings (Manila: National Historical Institute) 349.
5 Horacio de la Costa, Readings in Philippine History (Makati: Bookmark, 1965) 236 – 237.

Bibliography:
Rizal, Jose. Political and Historical Writings. Manila: National Historical Institute, 2000.
De la Costa, Horacio. Readings in Philippine History. Makati: Bookmark, 1965
De la Costa, Horacio. Trial of Rizal, W. E. Retana’s Transcription of the Official Spanish
Documents, edited and translated. Quezon City: Ateneo De Manila University
Press, 1996

Nery, John. Revolutionary Spirit: Jose Rizal in Southeast Asia. Quezon City: Ateneo de     Manila University Press, 2011

http://nhcp.gov.ph/rizal-issues-a-manifesto-to-proclaim-his-innocence/
Risen Opportunity: The Economic Role of
Filipino Women during the American regime
Posted on March 25, 2015

by Jacob Philip V. Peralta*

Over the years, the roles of women have been steadily rising in the fields of commerce and industry in the Philippines. From mere
members of a silent mass during the Spanish period, women have proven their tenacity for having undertaken crucial responsibilities in
society.[1]

During the Spanish era, the role of women was reduced to housekeeping and childrearing as this was stereotypical at that time. In
effect, women were viewed to be reserved, shy, and submissive to men. But despite all of these impressions on women, Dr. Maria
Luisa Camagay, in her book, Working Women of Manila in the 19th Century, wrote that “… Filipino women of the Spanish period had a
mind of their own, assertive, active, and enterprising…” However, because of the norms set by the Spaniards, their status remained to
be inferior to men.[2]

At the turn of the 19th century, numerous occupations became highly dependent on the presence of women employees, especially in
the manufacturing industry. The entry of women into the factory system showcased their industrious prowess highlighting their qualities
like adaptability, patience, and the resistance to commit frauds, which were deemed advantageous. Filipinas possessed great skills in
weaving, using different kinds of fiber like abaca, pineapple, silk, and cotton, to make a variety of cloths. They also excelled in making
hats, cigar cases, mats, baskets, slippers, purses, umbrellas, seat covers, etc.[3]

First thought of as a hobby, weaving eventually turned into a profitable business as they were able to earn money from selling their
products in public markets. Embroidery, usually a task done by women, became one of the chief exports of the Philippines during the
American colonization era. In 1921, the exportation of embroideries amounted to at least Php 15,000,000 and in 1919, exports of hats
amounted to Php 1,490,020.[4] The sheer number of export goods made by Filipinas proved the importance of their role in the
economic development of the country. Moreover, it was observed by the Americans that Filipinas showed signs of independence
because of their urge to improve the economic status of their families.[5]

The coming of the Americans created opportunities for women to earn college degrees and learn the essentials of business. According
to Mendoza-Guazon, women were employed in managerial positions as heads of business firms dealing in textiles and native cloths,
jewelry, embroideries, pawnshops, rice and foodstuff, bakeries, real estate, and transportation.[6] The influence of women in business
has even extended to retail and other industries previously dominated by men.[7]
An analysis of the role of women in society during the American regime showed their evolving presence in the economy. Filipinas were
given more responsibilities as managers in different industries because of their leadership skills and good work ethics.

The prioritization of education was responsible in improving the influence of women in the fields of trade and commerce. In the article
written by Carolyn Sobritchea, she mentioned that, “the kind of education the Filipino women received during the American colonial
period primarily prepared them to respond to the demands of the colonial bureaucracy and economy. With the increase in the female
literacy rate, more women gained access to new types of work and careers, like in law and science.”[8] The significance of this is that
women were able to get the opportunity to break away from traditional gender-related roles. This rise in opportunity became the
guiding light towards the independent Filipino women that we see today.

References:
Camagay, Maria Luisa. Working Women of Manila in the 19th century. Quezon City: University of the
Philippine Press, 1995
Mendoza-Guazon, Maria Paz. The development and progress of Filipino women. Manila: Bureau of Print,
1928
Sobritchea, Carolyn Israel. Women’s Role Philippine History: Selected Essays 2nd edition. American
Colonial Education and its impact on the status of Filipino women. Diliman, Quezon City: University
Center for Women’s Studies and the University of the Philippines, 1996
* The author is a student in De La Salle University Manila taking up AB History. He was a former
OJT in the National Historical Commission of the Philippines
[1] Camagay, Maria Luisa. Working Women of Manila in the 19th century. Quezon City: University of
the Philippine Press, 1995, p. 1.
[2] Ibid., p. 119.
[3] Mendoza-Guazon, Maria Paz. The development and progress of Filipino women. Manila: Bureau of
Print, 1928, p. 33.
[4] Ibid., p. 59.
[5] Ibid., p. 34.
[6] Ibid., p. 56.
[7] Ibid., p. 59.
[8] Sobritchea, Carolyn Israel. Women’s Role Philippine History: Selected Essays 2nd edition.
American Colonial Education and its impact on the status of Filipino women. Quezon City: University
Center for Women’s Studies and the University of the Philippines, 1996, p. 79.

http://nhcp.gov.ph/risen-opportunity-the-economic-role-of-filipino-women-during-the-american-regime/
Bonifacio, the Katipunan and the
Independence Day
Posted on June 12, 2013

BONIFACIO, THE KATIPUNAN AND THE INDEPENDENCE DAY

By Ian Christopher B. Alfonso

       On June 13, 2013, the Brazilian nation will celebrate the 250 th birth anniversary of one of the pillars of their nationhood, Jose
Bonifacio (José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva).  His place in the history of the Brazilian nation is comparable to his two namesakes in
the history of Filipino nationhood, Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio.  Jose Bonifacio, like Rizal, was a polymath, saw the role and value
of education to liberate his people against slavery and ignorance, and wanted to preserve Brazil from disintegration by lobbying to
Portuguese Cortes (Parliament) the autonomy under Portuguese monarchy (in contrast with Rizal’s idea of recognizing the Philippines
as a province of Spain).

      On the other hand, Jose Bonifacio, like Andres Bonifacio, heard the desire of the Brazilian people to be free and supported the
declaration of Brazilian Independence at Ipiranga Brook in São Paulo on 7 September 1822.   The event is called the Cry of Ipiranga,
which in the Philippines is comparable to three declarations of Philippine independence: the Cry of Pamitinan, where Bonifacio and
other Katipunan leaders declared Philippine independence at the Pamitinan Cave in Montalban, Distrito de Morong (Rodriguez, Rizal)
on Good Friday, 12 April 1895; the Cry of Pugadlawin where Bonifacio and members of Katipunan tore their community tax certificates
(cedulas personales) as a sign of breaking from Spain’s sovereignty, although accounts provide us various dates, either 20, 24, 25 and
26 August 1896 (and actually even the site, whether in Pugadlawin, Balintawak, Pasong Tamo, Kangkong or Bahay Toro); and lastly
the Declaration of Independence in Kawit, Cavite on 12 June 1898, not by Bonifacio but the one who succeeded him, Emilio
Aguinaldo, at the window of house.

       Following the stories of these events leads us to the realization that there were assorted ways and places of how and where our
founding fathers proclaimed Philippine independence.  Every event has its own significance and credence, depending on what the time
necessitates.

     The Filipino nation asserted to accept as our national day the first widely recognized declaration of independence, and that was the
Kawit declaration.  The Philippine Historical Association convinced then President Diosdado Macapagal in 1962 to move the
celebration of Philippine independence from July 4 to June 12.  Macapagal realized that June 12 was more symbolical than the other
date to the history of the Filipinos’ struggle to become one nation.
        The Kawit declaration was witnessed by the representatives of the provinces which recognized Emilio Aguinaldo’s authority
(although most of the Philippine provinces were still at fighting with Spain that time).   A document of independence, the Acta de la
Proclamacion de Independencia del Pueblo Filipino (The Act of Independence of the Filipino People), authored by Ambrosio Rianzares
Bautista, was read, sworn to and signed after.  The declaration in Kawit led to a much higher affirmation of the Filipinos’ dream to
become a nation-state through four significant acts leading to full sovereignty.  These were the creation of a Congress (15 September
1898), the ratification of Philippine independence by the Congress (29 September 1898), the creation of the constitution (21 January
1899) and the birthing of the first democratic constitutional republic in Asia (23 January 1899), all taking place in Malolos, Bulacan.  
According to Aguinaldo, the president of the said republic, the birth of the Republic justified the Filipinos’ fight for independence and
assertion for internal and external sovereignty, despite the Treaty of Paris’s discounting the Aguinaldo government’s existence as a
mere insurgent government.  The same republic defied United States’ intervention to Filipino nationhood, leading to the outbreak of
hostilities on 4 February 1899, the Philippine-American War.  The memory of this short-lived republic later became the springboard of
the Filipinos’ demand for autonomy from the United States government.  This led to ten years of Commonwealth government that in
turn was interrupted by World War II.  The end result was the July 4, 1946 establishment of the current Republic of the Philippines.

      Choosing June 12, 1898 as the date of Philippine Independence does not necessarily lessen the value of July 4, 1946.   The latter
date is still recorded and being taught in History as the grand day of complete, uninterrupted sovereignty (kasarinlan) and
independence (kalayaan) that gave birth to our present republic.  The move of Macapagal in 1962 only galvanized our determination to
decide our own fate and history as a nation.

       In the same manner, having our Independence Day on June 12 will not diminish the value of Cry of Pamitinan of 1895 and Cry of
Pugad Lawin of 1896.  These events will be forever remembered by generations as part of our efforts to move nationhood forward and
into reality.  However, one must not look at the attributes of a completely independent nation in a modern context when revisiting the
three declarations of Philippine independence.  One must consider the fact that our forefathers were still struggling for complete
independence, believing this could be achieved by first freeing the provinces from the Spaniards.  Our revolutionary fathers may have
fought independently of each other, in terms of strategy and means, since the early days of the revolution from Pinaglabanan to
Cabiao to Cacarong to Arayat to Noveleta to Salitran.  But they were united in one goal – to realize the independence of the
Philippines by means of revolution led by the Katipunan and Bonifacio.   The United States had beginnings like this. The thirteen British
states of East Coast in the Americas when they announced independence on 4 July 1776 were still at war with Great Britain.

        Tracing the Filipinos’ struggle for independence undeniably forces us to go back to our origins as a nation.   The Katipunan ng
mga Anak ng Bayan was the spark that lit the fires of freedom in the heart of the Filipinos – spreading the cause of independence from
Luzon to the Visayas and up to Mindanao.   Although Bonifacio did not live to witness the realization of his dreams, he remains in his
exalted place as the “Father of the Philippine Revolution” without which we would not be celebrating Araw ng Kalayaan every 12 th of
June.

http://nhcp.gov.ph/bonifacio-the-katipunan-and-the-independence-day/
Dakilang Bandilang Anak sa Labanan
Posted on May 27, 2013

DAKILANG BANDILANG ANAK SA LABANAN

by Ian Christopher B. Alfonso at Reymann L. Guevarra

      Nasa kabundukan na ng Cordillera, partikular sa Lubuagan, Distrito ng Lepanto (ngayon ay Kalinga) ang pamahalaang gerilyero ni
Hen. Emilio Aguinaldo.  Noo’y Disyembre 1899.  Nasa panahon pa rin ng pagluluksa ang mga kawal Pilipino sa pagkakapaslang sa
Pasong Tirad ni Hen. Gregorio del Pilar.  Ang kabayanihang iyon ni del Pilar ang dahilan upang makapagtago pa sa Lubuagan sina
Aguinaldo at maipagpatuloy ang pakikidigma sa mga Amerikano.  Ang buhay ni del Pilar ang dahilan upang mailigtas si Aguinaldo,
ang simbolo ng batang bansang Pilipinas, at makitang nakawagayway sa sariling lupain at papawirin ang Pambansang Watawat ng
Pilipinas.

       Sa Lubuagan ay kumatha ng isang tula si Aguinaldo ukol sa Pambansang Watawat.  Binanggit niya na “sa silangan araw ay sikat
na, Pilipinas [ang] unang nakakita” at “taglay [nito’y] tatlong talang maganda, pawang [makikinang] at mahalaga.”  Dagdag pa, “[ang]
sinag ng araw bilang ay walo, Pilipinas ang tinungo.”  Inilarawan rin ni Aguinaldo na ang Pambansang Watawat ay “dakilang bandilang
anak sa labanan galang sa’yo’y walang katapusan; ikaw ri’t ikaw ang [ipagdiriwang] kailan man, habang may buhay.”   Ang mga
taludtod na ito ay pawang mga pahayag ng pagbibigay-diin ni Aguinaldo na kailangang mabatid ng mga Pilipino na ang ating watawat
ay bunga ng pakikibaka ng mga Pilipino at ito’y dapat “ipagdiwang kailan man, habang may buhay.”

        Sa katunayan, bago pa man niya isulat ang tulang ito, noong 29 Setyembre 1898, sa araw ng pagratipika ng Congreso
Revolucionario sa kalayaan ng Pilipinas sa Simbahan ng Barasoain, unang ipinahayag ni Aguinaldo na ang Pambansang Watawat ay
“Bandilang ipinanganak sa pakikilaban” at “siya ngang tinatanghal at iginagalang sa buong Pilipinas.”   Ang naturang talumpati rin ang
unang pagpapahayag ni Aguinaldo sa kahulugan ng ating watawat.  Ayon sa kanya, ang pula ay sagisag ng tapang at kabayanihan ng
mga Pilipino at ang pinakakilalang kulay mula Cavite hanggang Biak-na-Bato.  Ang asul naman, na ayon kay Aguinaldo ay itim dapat,
ay kulay na nagpapahayag ng pagbabanta sa sinumang bansang nais mang-alipin muli ay mauubos ang lahat ng Pilipino bago nila
makuha ang Pilipinas.  Ang puti naman ay pagpapahayag ng pagsasarili ng mga Pilipino.  Ang mga bituwin ay sagisag ng Luzon,
Visayas at Mindanao.  Ang walong sinag ng araw ay ang walong lalawigang ipinailalim ng Espanya sa estado de guerra, at ang mga
lalawigang ito ang nagsilbing tanglaw sa iba pang lalawigan at mga katutubo ng kabundukan at ibang mga pulo upang sama-samang
labanan ang mga Espanyol.

       Nagsilbing tanglaw ng mga Pilipino sa gitna ng mga labanan ang Pambansang Watawat.  Mula nang ito’y unang masilayan ng
mga rebolusyunaryo sa daungan ng Cavite Nuevo noong 28 Mayo 1898 at opisyal na ipinakilala sa buong sangka-Pilipinuhan sa
Cavite el Viejo (Kawit) noong 12 Hunyo 1898, ang katayugan ng ating Pambansang Watawat ay sagisag ng kagalakan ng ating mga
ninuno sa pananagumpay ng ating kalayaan.  Sa bisa ng Acta de la Proclamacion de Independencia del Pueblo Filipino na binasa ni
Ambrosio Rianzarres Bautista, ang mga kinatawan ng iba’t ibang lalawigan ay nagkaisang gumamit ng iisang watawat at dito’y
“taimtim na [nanumpa] upang kilalanin at ipagtanggol ito hanggang sa huling patak ng kanilang dugo.”

     Wala na ang mga Espanyol.  Naisilang na ang unang demokratikong republikang konstitusyunal sa Asya noong 23 Enero 1899 sa
Malolos.  Dumating naman ang banta sa kalayaan at kasarinlan ng mga Pilipino – ang mga Amerikano.   Isa ang Estados Unidos ng
Amerika sa mga bansang hindi kumilala sa kalayaan ng Pilipinas at kumwestiyon sa paggamit ng ating mga ninuno ng Pambansang
Watawat.  Ito nama’y inilaban ni Felipe Agoncillo sa kanyang paggiit na kilalanin ng Espanya, Estados Unidos at Pransya ang
pamahalaang Pilipino.  Ganoon pa man, pinanindigan ng mga kawal ng unang republika ang pagdala sa Pambansang Watawat — sa
mga kaparangan, kapatagan, kabundukan, kung saan man sila dalhin ng kapalaran sa gitna ng Digmaang Pilipino-Amerikano.  
Bumagsak man ang pamahalaan ni Aguinaldo noong 23 Marso 1901 sa Palanan, hindi naman namatay ang pagtangi ng mga Pilipino
sa Pambansang Watawat.  May nagpatuloy sa digmaan; ang iba nama’y idinaan sa pagtatanghal ng zarzuela ang pagkondena sa
mga Amerikano.  Sinikil ng Pamahalaang Amerikano ang mga Pilipino sa pamamagitan ng pagbawal sa paggamit ng Pambansang
Watawat noong 1907.  Inilaban ito ng mga makabayang Pilipino sa lehislatura.  Hanggang sa noong 1919, napagwagian ng mga
Pilipino na muling maitaas ang Pambansang Watawat sa sariling lupain.

       Paano naman ang mga kabataan at kawal Pilipino noong Ikalawang Digmaang Pandaigdig?  Silang nanindigan na kaya rin nilang
ipagtanggol ang bansa laban sa mga Hapon, gamit ang Pambansang Watawat bilang kanilang inspirasyon?   Napagwagian nila ang
digmaan.  Kalaunan, nakita na ng Estados Unidos na dapat nang ibigay ang kasarinlan sa mga Pilipino.   At noong 4 Hulyo 1946,
naganap ang pinakadakilang araw ng ating pagkabansa – tuluyan nang naiwagayway sa Luneta ang Pambansang Watawat ng mag-
isa, buong laya.

     Sa madaling sabi, ang Pambansang Watawat ay simbolo ng buhay ng mga Pilipinong noo’y naglingkod sa ilalim nito, tangan ang
diwa’t damdaming isulong ang kalayaan at panindigan ang pagsasarili.

      Ang ating Pambansang Watawat ay kasa-kasama ng sangka-Pilipinuhan, simula pa noong tayo’y nag-asam na lumaya sa mga
Espanyol, nakidigma sa mga Amerikano at nakibaka sa paniniil ng mga Hapon.   Ang watawat na ito ay alaala ng ating pag-asa,
pagkakaisa at paninidigan na maging malaya at nagsasarili bilang isang lahi.  Mananatili itong nakawagayway bilang tanda na tayo’y
isang malayang bansa.  Ang simbolong magpapaalala sa bawat salinlahi na sa ilalim nito, nagpamalas ng kagitingan ang mga dakila
nating mga ninuno; silang hindi nangiming kumilos para sa kalayaan at walang kaabug-abog na inihandog ang buhay maisulong
lamang ang ipinaglalabang kalayaan.  Alang-alang sa kanilang alaala, ang paggalang sa Pambansang Watawat ay paggalang sa mga
ninuno nating ito.

    Manatili nawa sa ating mga Pilipino ang damdaming naramdaman ng ating mga ninuno sa tuwing masisilayan nilang
nakawagayway ang Pambansang Watawat.

http://nhcp.gov.ph/dakilang-bandilang-anak-sa-labanan/
From Redaction to Subversion A Study of the
Evolution of the Hiligaynon Corrido
Posted on September 7, 2012

FROM REDACTION TO SUBVERSION: A STUDY OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE HILIGAYNON

CORRIDO

      History is the master of destiny when properly accounted and remembered, she guides us home to peace, progress and harmonious
relations between man and nature. It engenders upon us an unequivocal hatred of all things evil.

      But History, when misunderstood and manipulated offers a destiny of cyclical social misery; guiding the nation to endure prolonged
economic hardship, corrupt and inefficient government, never ending rebellion, environmental degradation, joblessness, high cost of
living, low salaries, poverty, increasing cost of basic goods, social apathy, soaring crime rates, etc.

        A nation so antipathetic to its heritage must endure the unendurable, and bear the unbearable.

      We in the NHI have found out long ago that history holds the secrets for everlasting peace, sustainable progress and workable social
justice. We also found out that these secrets are zealously protected and hidden by traditional beliefs, rigid social norms, exclusive
educational system and severely restricting laws and bureaucracy created to enforce a status quo of a rich and powerful few and a
dominated and silenced majority. A formula imparted to us by our colonial heritage, formula negated by the Katipunan. Today, the
memory of the Katipunan is revered and respected in Philippine history, but the core of its being, that of militant agitation against
oppression, is being curtailed by the government.

      The book “From Redaction to Subversion A study of the Evolution of the Hiligaynon Corrido” by Ma. Cecilla
Nava, an NHI grantee is a story about Hiligaynon Corrido.

      Hiligaynon is the predominant dialect in Iloilo, (a pronouncement of the times challenged by many a Kinaray-a speaker, but that’s
another story).

      Corrido is an enduring fore in literary influence. A story of romance told in metrical cadences, they are mostly about chivalrous
knight and damsels in distress, love and loyalty, villainy and betrayal, monsters and magic and divine intervention.

        That the Hiligaynon Corridos were reflection of European romantic tradition was never questioned and most of the time these
Corridos have their counterpart in Tagalog, with similar theme and content. It was the infusion of Hiligaynon sensibilities into the
Corridos that the book focused its contention that the Hiligaynon Corridos acquired its unique presentation in a conscious effort to
dramatize an oppressive colonial era.

        There are seventy something corridor summaries in the book. European flavor is readily discernible, but strange twist of plots and
locally derived literacy additives decidedly give the Hiligaynon Corrido a distinctive identity. Also, anachronism are a plenty, a reader
might be thrown of the track upon reading an Egyptian Pharaoh giving away haciendas. A good scholar of history might be tempted to
say that Hiligaynon corrido is stranger than fiction. But then the book has a resounding repartee about this.

        A stranger story, and I am really wondering how it was turned into some kind of metrical romance is the Hiligaynon corrido about
King Solomon who had three hundred wives. He then falls in love with Queen Sheba who possesses three magic golden pubic hairs.
Sheba is kidnapped by a Muslim king who then becomes her husband. Queen Sheba then give her three golden pubic hairs to Solomon.
The pubic hairs have the power to shave off hunger even if one does not eat for a week. After a while Solomon find two soon beautiful
women and forgets the queen.

http://nhcp.gov.ph/from-redaction-to-subversion-a-study-of-the-evolution-of-the-hiligaynon-corrido/
The Palaris Revolt of 1762
Posted on September 6, 2012

THE PALARIS REVOLT OF 1762 

A revolt presaging the Ilocos Revolt led by Diego and Gabriela Silang, and unique in the history of Pangasinan for being led for the first
time by the common people broke out in Binalatongan, on November 3, 1762.  It spread to the other towns of the province including
Paniqui (then still a part of Pangasinan), Malasiqui, Bayambang, Manaoag, Santa Barbara, San Jacinto, Dagupan, Calasiao, and
Mangaldan.  Prior to this, uprisings in the province of Pangasinan including the Malong Revolt, which had been carried out against the
Spanish government, were conceived and led not by the heretofore silenced masses but by the principalia, or the native officials, as well
as the local aristocracy. 

But whereas before, the common people found allies and even leaders, such as Andres Malong among the native officials, this time the
1762 revolt of the people of Binalatongan found very little sympathy among their local native officials.  Their leader, though the son of a
cabeza de barangay, turned out to be someone described as being of the timaua class- the ordinary people—Juan de la Cruz Palaris. 

        Several factors brought about the Palaris Revolt.  Whereas the Malong Revolt, which occurred in 1660-61, had the Spanish-Dutch
War as background, this time the Palaris Revolt not only transpired on the heels of British victory over Spanish Manila, then as now the
center of national government, but can be said to have been facilitated by the same event.

The revolt sprang directly from the unmet demands of the common people: relief from compulsory labor1; the return of the already
collected tributes; the banning of foreigners from holding local office; removal from office of civil and police officials- including the
provincial governor, and the appointment of natives in their place2.  The people considered the Spanish and Spanish-appointed
officials as abusive and burdensome to them.  The heaviest burden however was the payment of the tribute— in the form of rice
harvests.  For over 200 years from the onset of Spanish colonization, the farming folk of Pangasinan had reeled under the onus of
paying the tribute which continually became harder to bear for even as the amount of harvests remained niggardly or at subsistence
levels for the ordinary people, the tributes were regularly increased by the colonial masters in order to sustain the ever rising needs of
both the church and the government.3  Thus by the time the British had invaded Manila, the spark of rebellion had long been lit among
the simple folk of Binalatongan.  News of British victory over the Spaniards in Manila merely turned the spark into a burning torch.

Immediately prior to the event, Manila had sought reinforcements from the provinces, and while the rest of Pangasinan was unable to
make a quick response, a battalion of over a thousand men from Binalatongan was immediately formed upon the governor’s orders
and dispatched to Manila.  It was on their way there that the Spanish debacle at the hands of the mightier British occurred and news of
this reached the troops.  When the latter returned to Pangasinan the people interpreted the event as the end of Spanish reign that for
them translated in turn into the end of their sufferings.  In time there grew within the people’s hearts the resolve to finally end their
misery by refusing to pay the tribute and to demand redress of their other long-held grievances.
The spirit of rebellion began to spread in Pangasinan, prompting the provincial governor to vacate the capitol and make ready for his
and his family’s quick evacuation at a moment’s notice.  An intermediary between the governor and the people came in the person of
the province’s Vicar.  He tried to convince the governor to continue in office and resume his round of the various towns and attempt a
mutually satisfactory compromise with the people.  He refused to heed the advice of the vicar constituting instead a commission that
would embark on the year’s collection of taxes.  This commission began to carry out its job smoothly throughout the towns until it came
to the town of Binalatongan, whose people refused to pay the tribute, their town mates’ suffering at the march to Manila still a rankling
wound.  After several days they went out of their houses and began congregating to plan their next moves.

A leader arose in the person of Palaris, who was aided by one named Colet (which some accounts say was his brother); the Hidalgo
brothers and Juan de Vera Oncantin.  He led the people in assailing the Spanish officials headed by the governor and forcing him to
give in to their demands.  Aided by his town mates, he was able to seize the arsenal and get hold of the arms.  Fortunately, the vicar
and the priests managed to temper the fire of rebellion, but only for a while.  In the meantime the demand of the people to have only
native Pangasinenses to serve as local officials was granted; thus from 1762 to 1763, only the priestly profession was open to
Spaniards.

Meanwhile, as the Spanish-British conflict came to an end with the signing of a peace treaty in Paris, the Spaniards reclaimed
Pangasinan from the natives, the tribute system was re-imposed, and their military campaign against the rebels resumed.  This final
phase of the rebellion turned out to be the bloodiest, the rebels led by Palaris standing their ground employing “scorched-earth”4
tactics to inflict the greatest toll on the Spaniards– at one point burning the town of Binalatongan, and the Spaniards unleashing all
their military might upon the rebels.  In the end the rebels were routed, forced to escape into the forests, hunted down and captured. 
Many of them were executed, their bodies cut into pieces and exhibited to serve as warning and strike fear upon the people, the better
to quench any future uprising.  Said to have been betrayed by his own sibling, Palaris was caught and hanged on February 26, 1765. 
His hometown Binalatongan was later transferred and renamed San Carlos in the hope of erasing all memory of the Palaris revolt, but
his legacy of fighting for justice and freedom lived on in the hearts of the Pangasinenses, spreading to the rest of his countrymen, and
forming ‘another step in the right direction’5 towards the Revolution of 1896.

1 National Historical Institute, Filipinos in History, Vol. IV, Manila, 1994, P. 82.
2 Rosario Cortes Mendoza, Pangasinan, 1572-1800, Quezon City: U.P. Press, 1974, P.178.
3 Ibid., P. 179.
4 National Historical Institute, Filipinos in History, Vol. IV, P. 82.
5 Reynaldo C. Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution Popular Movements in the Philippines, 1840-1910. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila
University Press, p. 7.
(by Ma. Cielito G. Reyno)

http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-palaris-revolt-of-1762/
First and Official Flag Raising in Mindanao
Posted on September 6, 2012

Resolving A Contentious Issue:

An Overview Of The NHI’s Position On The First And Official Flag Raising In Mindanao

      When the centenary of the country’s independence was celebrated in 1998, a plethora of emotions were felt in each and every hearts
of Filipinos.  The centennial anniversary on June 12, 1998; indeed, was a remembrance of the Filipinos’ struggles for freedom and
justice more than a century ago.  While the event generated interest in the study of Philippine history, it also produced a great number
of issues that needed utmost attention.  One of those was the controversy on the first and official flag raising in Mindanao.  Three
contenders: Surigao, Butuan and Cagayan de Oro claimed that the raising of the Philippine tricolor took place in their
jurisdiction.   Their claims, in a way, were not unfounded for based on available documents and accounts, these areas were the first
ones to hoist the country’s flag in Mindanao.   As a background, the province of Mindanao was the last province in the country
evacuated by the Spaniards.  The withdrawal of the last colonial authorities and the establishment of the revolutionary government and
the raising of the flag clearly signified the country’s independence.

The National Historical Institute (NHI) of course, has taken note about the controversy.  It was imperative for the Institute to resolve the
dispute.  As former NHI Chairman Dr. Pablo Trillana once said, the flag raising in Mindanao is important because the event has a
certain relationship to the birth of the nation.  So as a fitting end to the raging controversy, the NHI initiated a two-day round table
discussion on the controversy, held on the 2nd week of January 2000.  The deliberation conducted by the panel of experts determined
the area in Mindanao where the first and official flag raising happened.  While the primary concern was to end the dispute, the NHI,
through the round-table discussion, was also able to gather more information on the significant personages and circumstances
connected with the event.

      The conference was convened by a panel of distinguished members known for their wisdom and fairness.  The panel included
Justice Camilo D. Quiason; Dr. Sabino G. Padilla, Jr.; Professor Talampas and Dr. Jaime B. Veneracion. 

      Meanwhile, representatives from the contending areas defended their claims using primary documents or secondary sources of
sound probative value.  The NHI for proper evaluation adopted these principles.  The speakers considered experts on their localities’
history were Mr. Gregorio Jose Palma Hontiveros and Rev. Fr. Joesilo C. Amalla for Butuan; Mr. Antonio J. Montalvan II and Ms.
Agnes Paulita R. Roa for Cagayan de Oro and; Mr. Fernando A. Almeda Jr. and Atty. Jose C. Sering for Surigao.

Surigao’s Stand
      The Surigao representatives used the diary of Fr. Alberto Masoliver, S.J., the parish priest of Surigao in 1898, for supporting their
case.  The diary, entitled Diario dela Casa de Surigao, is currently kept in the Jesuit archives at Centro Borja, San Cugat del Valles,
Spain.  The accounts of Fr. Masoliver are cited in the book Angry Days in Mindanao by Fr. Peter Schreurs.

      Summarizing the position of the Suriganons, “The Philippine Flag was raised in Surigao in the morning of December 26, 1898 at
the Casa Real (town hall), which also housed the Tribunal (courthouse).  Surigao then was the cabecera and the seat of government
of the province of Caraga which had jurisdiction over Surigao, Butuan and Cagayan de Misamis.” The president of the Junta
Provincial of Surigao, as of 26 December, was Alejandro (Jantoy) Gonzales.

Butuan’s Position

      To bolster their claim, the representatives of Butuan, meanwhile cited the documents from the Philippine Insurrection Records,
Angry Days in Mindanao by Fr. Schreurs and, Mision dela Compania de Jesus en Filipinas en el Siglo XIX by Fr. Pablo Pastels.

      The position of the Butuan side was that the tricolor was raised in Butuan on 17 January 1899, with Governor Wenceslao Gonzales
personally presiding over the flag-raising ceremony in full regalia.  The governor later reported the event to President Emilio Aguinaldo
on February 2, 1899.

The Case of Cagayan de Oro (de Misamis)

      On their part, the Speakers from Cagayan argued that the flag was raised on January 10 1899 when the five-man Concejo Provincial
of the revolutionary government assumed office.  The members of the Concejo were chosen in accordance with Aguinaldo’s decree of
June 18, 1898.  On that occasion, the newly installed municipal head, Toribio Chaves y Roa recited the poem “Pinahanongod”, and
explained the meaning and symbols of the flag. 

      The Bautista Manuscript, and the Report to the President of the Revolutionary Government by Jose Roa y Casa were used to by the
representatives of Cagayan to strengthen their case.

The Panel’s decision

      Summarizing the findings of the panel and the comments of some experts from the history department of UP such as Dr. Evelyn
Miranda, Professor Digna P. Apilado and Dr. Eden Gripaldo, it was recommended that the first and official flag raising occurred in
Surigao.  Surigao’s arguments were able to satisfy the criteria set by the panel.  The information that they gave which states that the
tricolor was raised on the 26th of December 1898 as against 10 January in Cagayan and 17 January 1899 in Butuan is or was recorded
in the diary of Fr. Alberto Masoliver, now kept in the Jesuit Archives in Spain.  Aside from this, no one from the Butuan and Cagayan
sides refuted the entry in Fr. Masoliver’s diary.  Regarding if the flag raising was official, the panel, relied on the second criterion set by
the rules of the Competition: whether the event was in clear identification with, and in pursuance of the aims and struggles of the
revolutionary government.  This criterion was used since all three contenders were unable to show any proof, based on the first
criterion, that the raising of the flag was sanctioned by the Philippine Revolutionary Government of Aguinaldo. 
Without a doubt, the events in Butuan and Cagayan were official since both fell within the terms of reference set by rules of the
competition.  However, Surigao was also able to satisfy this particular rule.  To quote the panel report: “The Aguinaldo proclamation of
18 June 1898, establishing a dictatorial government was made known to sympathizers of the revolution.  The news of the defeat of
the Spanish armada… fanned the flames of rebellion, forcing Spanish officials and friars to abandon their posts… The Spanish
governor of Surigao on 23 December 1898, and forthwith, a provisional junta assumed control of the government could take over. 
Elected as Chairman of the Junta was Alejandro Gomez… So when Fr. Masoliver saw the Filipino flag flying at the Casa Real and the
Tribunal of Surigao on December 26… the revolutionary government for the province, albeit provisional, was already in place… The
Butuan Panel admitted that Alejandro Gonzales established an interim government in Surigao… There is no denying that the event
was in clear identification of the aims and struggles of the revolution.”

http://nhcp.gov.ph/first-and-official-flag-raising-in-mindanao/
A HISTORY OF NATIONAL MANIPULATION

      History keeps unfolding even as we keep on ignoring it. The answers to our social problems are there, reformatted and formulated
by historians and delivered to us in blood and tears – splattered papers. With national memories made up of the likes of Lapu-lapu,
Sultan Kudarat, Gabriela Silang, Jose Rizal, Andres Bonifacio, Apolinario Mabini, Ramon Magsaysay, Ninoy Aquino, etc. We should
have long ago elevated the nation to the pinnacle of glorious existence.

      They say we wallow in social misery because we as a people never learn. That is not so true. We never really “never learn,” it’s just
that we are being prevented from learning what should have been learned long ago.

      We are prevented by the government, by our traditional beliefs and social norms, themselves products of manipulation by those
who benefit from the state of the nation being misled and misruled.

      The dominant mode of living is enforced upon us by a systematic education that provides the knowledge, skills and encouragement
so we can adapt to a dictated destiny. The school curriculum is clearly constructed through a selective process of teaching methods and
exclusive retelling of cultures and experiences. The discrediting of histories of most collective resistance that matter and the muffling of
echoes of injustice by targeting non-critical issues in the classrooms are so subtle that students get so excited debating the intrigues of
the revolution, instead of reflecting on the necessity of a radical change. Indeed, this nation celebrates and reveres the memory of the
revolution, concluding its ending as successful. It is a glancing blow to the armored fortress of historical truth. The truth is the
revolution was stopped dead in the night, not by the men who led it, certainly not by the men and women who fought for it, not even by
the might of the armies that opposed it. The revolution stopped on its own accord. Like a living entity with a mind of its own, it stopped
moving by its own decision. A revolution fathered by social injustice and incubated for centuries by malgovernance is a thing of beauty,
like a heavenly symphony, it rolls on via a perfect combination of tone and timbre, and nothing less can make it play. Thus, a
miscalculation, hesitation or discord among the revolutionists made the revolutionary process stop. But no true revolution is ever
permanently stopped. It only hibernates, while generation of revolutionaries rally to find the perfect pitch of consciousness to bridge
the revolutionary lull.

Life under colonialism is a life of hell. So true in Southeast Asia, Africa, North and South America, Australia, everywhere. Revolution
against colonialism is never wrong. In fact, it is always moral. The oppression of people for the good of another nation is always wrong.
The men who formed and joined the Katipunan certainly knew that. And the time of this realization was the defining moment of their
existence. Our Muslim brothers have known that all the time, but their defensive measures for freedom have been deliberately
misunderstood. 

      The conviction of the Katipuneros was not enough to carry on the revolution to its desired end. Contradictions among leaders,
whom many were anxious to maintain  wealth and status quo, emerged. Resistance from the elite made it necessary for the
Revolutionary leaders (who needed their prestige, influence and money for the consolidation of power) to entertain the mode of
political accommodation and compromise. But political accommodation entails the preservation and continuation of social systems
and entities being protested in return for social assistance, more often monetary. In the Philippines, political accommodation (or
reconciliation) helped return to power persons representative of a much despised social system. Reconciliation is a favorite government
slogan to preserve peace. It was also a very effective antidote to a budding revolution. To be sure, it ushered in development to the
Philippines, but it did not alter the state of economic dependency of the Philippines nor the severely unequal distribution of wealth
among the people.  This was very clear during the commonwealth era and the post-EDSA revolution period. These were the times when
minute superficial social changes were encouraged and popularized as momentous and historic social transformation. This was to
manipulate the sentiments of the people and convince them of the necessity and workability of rehashed political systems. It brought
the people some kind of social diversionary role that gave them phantasmic participatory feelings in reworking the society. It was a
masterful manipulation method of the politically inconsiderate. EDSA II was symptomatic of this. There was euphoria among the
people who joined the rallies and demonstrations against President Estrada after he stepped down. But the real reason for his ouster
was the political turnabout of the military.

      It was putting the revolution in high reversed gear.

      The persistent effort of those in power to preserve the status quo seesaws from the willing to bargain to the violently intolerant. The
use of force to discourage a radical social or political change usually is the hallmark of a government employing oppression as the basis
of its survival and to preserve a way of privileged life. This phenomenon may be sincerely believed by its enforcers as the only true way
to live a manageable life. A divergent code of ethics antagonistic to its principle is usually responded to with persecution.

      To encourage people to live a way of life supportive to the survival of the rulers and in prolonging their dominance, the government
issues grants and policies, devices laws and regulations, specifies the form of language, popularizes jobs and social conditions, decrees
education and learning methods to conform and convince people of the rationality of the kind of life being enforced upon them.

      To persuade the people never to struggle in the interest of their liberation, the rulers oftentimes obscure the skies for any sign of
hope that despair becomes convincingly permanent. The strategic softening of the will readies the people to accept their role in the
tragedy of life, and supposedly make them feel heroic that through their miseries others could live a fuller, more comfortable life. These
subtle twistings of national occurrences to entrap the people to unresisting servility are not so hard to detect and expose by the
inquisitive mind.

This is the real function of history. It is the ultimate instrument of revelation. In the hands of the humanizing ones, it can be called upon
to provoke the people to unite in confronting their oppressors and demand their liberation. Reading history to the core of its truthness,
with the inquiring mind looking deep into the memory of oppression, one can not help but be angry. And an angry man provoked by
history is a righteous man, and an enemy of those who oppress.

      The revolution may have found its missing timbre this time. (by Peter Jaynul Uckung)

http://nhcp.gov.ph/a-history-of-national-manipulation/
Revolutionary Aftermath
Posted on September 6, 2012

REVOLUTIONARY AFTERMATH
by Peter Jaynul Villanueva Uckung

“Other historians relate facts to inform us of facts. You relate them to incite in our hearts an intense hatred of lying, ignorance,
hypocrisy, superstition, tyranny; and the anger remains even after the memory of the facts has disappeared.”
Diderot, praising Voltaire

      The brief air of freedom that the Declaration of Independence brought about on June 12, 1898 to the Philippines was censured by
the American government with Emilio Aguinaldo’s oath of allegiance to the government of the United States on April 1, 1901. This
became the starting date for considering unyielding Filipino fighters as bandits.

     The war for freedom did not end with the oath of allegiance to the American government by the Philippine president. The
revolutionary momentum could not be stopped by mere signatures of captured prominent persons, or by the Treaty of Paris, wherein
Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States for twenty million dollars. The United States actually suffered more casualties after
Aguinaldo’s surrender, which was ironic, because the Americans were banking on his capture for Filipino resistance to end.

       The winds of war have planted the seeds of revolutionary ideals all over the country, and the prime mover of revolutionary zeal was
the idea that total freedom through armed confrontation could be achieved after all. It was countered by the Americans with total war
and ruination.

       The list is long of heroes and heroism; of battles and brutalities; of soldiers and victims.  The conflict after the American declaration
of benevolent assimilation was deadlier, fiercer, and more violent than any theater of war that the American soldier went into.

       Macario Sakay continued fighting the Americans in the Sierra Madre Mountain Range. Vicente Lukban still commanded the most
feared bolo men in Samar. In Bicol, Simeon Ola still waited in ambush deep in the jungles.

       In Mindanao, despite the Bates Treaty, signed by the Sulu Sultan and the Americans, resistance in Sulu flourished like a frenzied
festival of death. And Muslim warriors did die, almost always to the last man. Panglima Hassan led his men in fighting the Americans,
defying the Sultan’s command of desistance. Then, there was Jikiri- the swiftest and most ferocious waterborne warrior that ever
prowled the waters of Sulu. In Lanao there was Ampuanagus. In Cotabato there were Datu Ali and Datu Alamada.
       Famous battles there were a-plenty. The Balangiga encounter and the Pulajanes reddened the memory of the American soldiers
with blood. And so did Bud Dajo and Bud Baksak in Jolo; Taraca and Bayang in Lanao. The ravages of the war for freedom were
testaments to the determination of the Filipinos to attain it.

        American arms decidedly defeated the Filipinos, and an era of relative peace was maintained.

        Freedom is not only based on the sovereignty of the government, it is ultimately based on the quality of existence of the people
being governed.

       Aware of this, and all-fired up by the memory of the revolution, well-meaning men launched protests after protests on issues
ranging from unfair labor practice to economic dependency to the U.S.; agrarian unrest to government corruption and ineptitude. The
problem of tenancy was questioned, criticized and acted upon by the government, forced into action by a united and very angry union
of farmers. There were instances of armed uprisings. Tayug of Pangasinan was one (1931), led by Pedro Colosa who organized a
Katipunan-like group.

       With militant uprising condemned by the Americans, collective protests by workers became paramount. Dominador Gomez,
Isabelo de los Reyes and Lope K. Santos became synonymous with the birth of labor unions in the Philippines.

      And then came the Sakdalistas; founded by Benigno Ramos. It was the bitterest opponent of the colonial establishment in all its
dehumanizing aspects. It was militarily put down when its bolo-wielding members launched an armed uprising on May 2, 1935.

       With severe military censure, many protesters, peasants and idealistic men went underground. There were those who fought the
military head on. Some, like Teodoro Asedillo and Nicolas Encallado were recognized by their supporters as some kind of Robin Hood.
When Asedillo was killed in Laguna in 1935, his bullet-riddled body was displayed from town to town as some sort of warning.

      Wary of the grim ending of the Sakdalista revolt but still angry, and still well meaning, some supported social justice in the
Philippines on their own terms, like Pedro Abad Santos, who founded his Socialist party. His ambivalence to legal procedures in
attaining social justice endeared him to the most common of men.

       Freedom is more popularly equated to the sovereignty of a nation. But as history shows, especially our history, freedom is
essentially about social justice, economic equality and cultural progress.

       And today we are still fighting for freedom; freedom from fear of human rights abuse; fear of hunger, fear of environmental
degradation; fear of pandemic diseases, fear of economic chaos, fear of corrupt government officials, etc.

        The fight for freedom goes on.

http://nhcp.gov.ph/revolutionary-aftermath/
The Philippine Revolution in the Province of
Masbate
Posted on September 6, 2012

MEN IN RED
By: Quennie Ann J. Palafox 

      Red gives the revolution its meaning as it is the color that painted the histories of many countries in the world. It has
been a common practice of rioters who go to the streets to tie red cloths around their foreheads because, obviously, it
signifies resistance against the status quo.

Often, revolution is expressed in the form of a red flag, and in the design of the national flags all over the world, red is
widely used. It may be associated with the emotional state of being in love, or it can be the color of roses that are given in
every Valentines Day of each year. Although the color signifies several states of being, it is a symbolism of powerful
feelings such as passion, courage, sacrifice and others. In Masbate, there were men who initiated the fight for freedom;
feared and dreaded, and dressed in red. They gave the Spaniards the terror of their lives.

      The green fields of Masbate and its crystal-clear beaches were once a site of a bloody battle when a movement called
pulahan or pulahanes burned and sacked the towns of Masbate in the revolution initiated by the Tagalogs. These
pulahanes wore red cloth but why were they called pulahanes is still subject to further verification. The pulahanes did
not belong to the Katipunan but they deemed themselves part of the revolutionary forces. Most of the provinces were
liberated by the revolutionary forces but not in the case of Masbate, the Spaniards had already departed from the colony
when the contingent headed by Gen. Riego de Dios arrived. An event that paved the way to the evacuation of the
Spaniards from Masbate was the siege laid down by the pulahanes led by Pedro Quipte (Kipte). The emancipation of the
Masbate province from the yoke of colonialism was attributed to the legendary Quipte, whose parentage remains a
mystery.

    There are immense accounts on the history of Kabikolan, but there are still provinces that need further exploration
such as Catanduanes and Masbate to bring the inadequacy of knowledge of yesteryears into a halt. The Exodus of the
Spaniards in Masbate on August 19, 1898 came ahead of the departure of the Spaniards in the port of Legazpi on
September 23, 1898 signaling the end of Spanish rule in the Bicol region.

The Christianization of Masbate

       The province of Masbate comprises the islands of Burias, Ticao and Masbate. Burias derived its name from the buri,
a palm tree endemic on the island. Ticao is a tiny strip of land, south of Sorsogon province, north of Masbate, and close
to the Strait of San Bernardino. During the Manila-Acapulco galleon trade, the Acapulco-bound galleons anchored here
to escape heavy monsoon rains before the coming of typhoon and for replenishment.  Masbate, the largest and richest of
the three islands of Bicol west of San Bernardino Strait, was then hardly populated. By 1844 only three small towns
existed on the northern coast, namely, Baleno, Mobo and Palanas. The whole southern coast was placed under the
mercy of the Moros.

       The Christianization of Masbate dated back to 1569 when the Spanish explorers set their feet in the island. Fray
Alonzo Jimenez, an Augustinian, was the first missionary to Masbate. Like in other parts of Luzon, the natives fled to
the mountains in defiance of the Spaniards. The expeditions headed by Enrique de Guzman and Captain Andres Ibarra
ended the resistance of the natives who eventually conceded to the new rulers of the island resulting to the
establishment of settlements in the islands of Burias, Ticao and Masbate. But long before the advent of the Spaniards, a
thriving commerce already existed between the natives of Masbate and Chinese traders in the first decade of the 16th
century.
 
      By July 1574 Governor-Geneneral Guido de Lavezares wrote to Philip II informing that the lands of the Camarines,
Sorsogon, including the adjacent islands of Masbate, Burias, Ticao and Catanduanes were placed under the royal crown
of Spain. In 1688, the Recollects took charge of the spiritual administration of the islands.

The Siege of Masbate and the Spanish Exodus

       The rebellion in Masbate and other parts of Kabikolan might have been encouraged by the miserable conditions of
the inhabitants in the various shipyards like the revolt by Agustin Sumuroy from June 1649 to July 1650, and the
abusive polo system. The pulahanes originating from the barrio of Malobago in Cataingan, Masbate besieged Pilar in the
last months of the Spanish regime. Considered fanatics and illiterate by the educated Filipinos in Masbate, the
movement failed to get their support, but it won thousands adherents among the local people. Thus, the pulahanes
treated the educated class as enemies similar to the Spaniards.

      The Spanish governor, Don Luis Cubero y Rojas, attempted to organize a local militia but an assault against the
rebels was not possible as the Spaniards were insufficient in number. The Visayan General Headquarters could not send
reinforcement as they suffered the same problem. Caught in a dangerous situation and the threat of pulahan attack, the
Spaniards and loyal Filipinos, who numbered 1000 therefore, decided to abandon the island and fled to Capiz on August
19, 1898. Following the departure of the Spaniards, the capital was occupied by the pulahanes; they plundered the
capital and burned the houses to the ground before abandoning it and returning to Uson.

The Establishment of Revolutionary Government in Masbate

       While Luzon, especially the Tagalog region, was engaged in fighting against the Spanish government, Aguinaldo
deployed expeditionary forces led by Generals Justo Lukban and Riego de Dios to the Visayas and Masbate. Brig. Gen.
Don Mariano Riego de Dios with soldiers from Cavite left Cavite on July 22, 1898. The revolutionary forces headed by
Gen. Riego de Dios arrived in Masbate on the last days of August and found the town annihilated by the pulahanes led
by its general, Pedro Quipte, after the Spaniards and loyal Filipinos escaped.  Since the Spaniards had left the town,
Riego de Dios persuaded Quipte to disband the pulahan as it was deemed unnecessary to maintain such a large army.

       In the bay of the Masbate, the revolutionary forces had a brief encounter with the Spanish squadron consisting of
five gunboats and a brigantine that resulted to the sinking of the Filipino ship Bulusan. Pedro Quipte, the leader of the
pulahan, did not return to Masbate after Riego de Dios commissioned him to deliver the instruction to the captain of
Isabe who was in Cataingan to hide the ship from the enemies. Meanwhile, local governments were set up in the towns
along the coast up to Cataingan. The representatives from the revolutionary government were well received in all towns
of Masbate, the people showed their willingness and cooperation to establish a new government under the
revolutionaries government. The provinces of Masbate and Sorsogon were placed under the auspice of Gen. Diokno who
arrived at the end of September in San Pascual, Burias Island.  A historic event was witnessed by the local people with
the proclamation of the revolutionary government in the town and unfurling of the Filipino flag in the plaza.
http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-philippine-revolution-in-the-province-of-masbate/
Revolutions and Exodus of the Spanish
Colonies in Albay, Camarines Sur and
Masbate
Posted on September 6, 2012

REVOLUTIONS AND EXODUS OF THE SPANISH COLONIES IN ALBAY, CAMARINES SUR AND MASBATE
By: Quennie Ann J. Palafox

        It was the year 1892 when the Katipunan was formed which endeavored for the collapse of the three hundred-year Spanish regime
in the country and bring back the lost freedom to the natural inhabitants who were brainwashed and turned into slaves by the
Spaniards. The nationalistic spirit of Philippine revolution came later in the Bicol region, far later than the eight provinces placed under
martial law by Governor-General Ramon Blanco, roughly due to its geographic location- being a peninsula surrounded by natural
barriers. While some in Luzon were joyous of the independence they have just acquired, in Tarlac for instance, it was emancipated from
the Spanish government in July 10, 1898 by Francisco Makabulos,  in Bicol, the Bicolanos have their arms wide open for the Spanish
government. There were already news about Bicolanos being arrested and detained in prison without sufficient evidence to the
allegation of rebellion, the Spanish government, to prevent the flow of sympathy from the Bicolanos for their compatriots, which may
instigate an insurrection, made use of propaganda to brainwash the people and to secure their loyalty to the Spaniards.  The Bicolanos
were ill-informed about the principal reason of the insurrection initiated by Andres Bonifacio, with the Cry of Pugadlawin that occurred
about the last days of August 1896. Surprisingly, famous reformists such as Rizal, who fought the Spaniards with his writings, was
unfamiliar not even to a single Albayanos. The deeds of Andres Bonifacio and Emilio Jacinto and the existence of a then secret society
called Katipunan did not bring even a whisper in the ears of the Bicolanos. In the month of September, the government organized and
armed a company of volunteers composed entirely of Bicolanos. The Bicolanos proved that they were real friends to the Spaniards. Don
Mariano Riosa, a prominent Filipino merchant of Tabaco, Albay, contributed 3,000 packages of cigarettes and 4, 000 cigars.  This only
proved that the wealthy Filipinos were willing to pour their resources just to help the Spaniards in putting down the Filipino
insurrection movements. Perhaps, those the ‘haves’ were already assimilated to the culture of the Spaniards and at the same time, they
were enjoying high status in the community for which they were reluctant to give up just for the sake of the ‘have-nots’.

        The province of Albay was not alone in Bicol region refusing to join the insurrectional movement and in standing loyally by the
Crown of Spain. The provinces of Camarines Norte, Camarines Sur, Burias and the military districts of Calamianes, Catanduanes,
Masbate and Ticao, contributed for the cause of the government to help them subdue the rebellion.  Spanish authorities, who became
paranoid from what was happening in the Tagalog region, began arresting influential persons who were suspected of rebellion and
imposed the inhumane torture of prisoners.  One of the victim belonging to the upper class that were victimized by this unlawful arrests
was Florencio Lerma, a wealthy man in Nueva Caceres, Camarines Sur. Although he denied the allegation of organizing a plot against
the government and was even tortured to admit the things he didn’t know, they were sentenced to death. The same fate befell other
men arrested for allegedly participating in the rebellion that spread in the Tagalog region. Even religious man was not excused, Fr.
Gabriel Prieto, parish priest of Malinao, Albay, was accused to have committed the crime of rebellion within the jurisdiction of
Camirines Sur and was imprisoned together with the prominent persons suspected of having schemed a serious plot to assassinate all
the Spaniards in Nueva Caceres . The Bicol Martyrs composed of 3 priests and twelve laymen were brought to Manila and eleven of
them were executed on January 4, 1897 in Bagumbayan for being guilty of the crime of rebellion.

       The pact of Biak-na-Bato in 1897 aimed to end the armed conflict between the Spaniards and the revolutionists under Gen.
Aguinaldo and news came to Albay that the Spanish government accepted the terms laid down by Aguinaldo. It aroused the suspicion
of the Albayanons that the Spaniards were having a hard time suppressing the rebels. The Spanish evasion of their promises enclosed
in the Pact of Biyak-na-Bato caused bitter disappointments among the people. Thus, the Spaniards lost much of their prestige among
the people. The raid in Pamplona in Camarines Sur on November 14, 1897 where the gobernadorcillo and some cuadrilleros were tied
to the posts led the Albayanos to believe that the Tagalog insurrection had finally come to the Bicol region.

      The pulahan movement, a local militant movement composed of men wearing red clothes, gave the Spanish government a strong
blow and exacerbated their worsening position in the region. This group was said to have originated in the barrio of Malobago,
municipality of Cataingan, Masbate province. These bold pulahanes won the support and admiration of the local populace that many
were convinced to join the movement against the Spaniards, although, they failed to win the patronage of the wealthy and educated
class.  The Spanish authorities of Albay received in the last days of August news of the unfavorable outcome of the war with the United
States, of the capitulation of Manila to the Americans, and of the expedition to the Bicol region of Gen. Lukban. The authorities decided
to abandon the province for lack of sufficient forces for its defense, and to form beforehand a committee of prominent Filipinos to
which the Spanish could turn over the government.

          Don Emilio Morera confirmed the Spanish surrender to the Americans and this news spread in Albay. On the night of 14
September 1898, several Spanish families left with Morera aboard the steamer Brutus without any suspicion coming from the
Albayanos. Rumors even spread that the Spaniards are planning to execute Filipinos upon their departure from the province, as well
as the news of the execution of the native civil guards and prominent Filipinos of Daet in April 1898, and the massacres in Pilar and
Panlatuan. These news frightened the Albayanos so they decided to arm themselves in their homes with bolos, spears and arrows in
order for them to defend their lives. This time, the people already know that the Spaniards were the real enemies, not the Tagalogs, or
even their fellow Bicolanos.

          On September 20, rumors spread that the civil guards of Nueva Caceres mutinied, assassinated their officers and placed all
Spanish officials in jail. Weak enough to fight the rebels, the provincial governor, Don Vicente Zaidin, decided to capitulate. The
capitulation took effect at ten o’clock of that morning. Corporal Angeles assumed the leadership of the insurrection. The victory of the
civil guards in Nueva Caceres resulted to the evacuation of the peninsulares resident of the said region. The provinces in Bicol were
handed back to the Filipinos by the Spaniards peacefully after three centuries of domination. On September 23, Spaniards who lived in
the remote towns arrived in Legaspi with their families and left for Manila aboard the ships. This triumphant event marked the
independence of the Bicol region from Spanish auspice, a very important event in our history that we have to rekindle and remember.
Source: The Philippine revolution in the Bicol Region / Elias M. Ataviado; translated into English by Juan T. Ataviado. Quezon City:
New Day Publishers, 1999.

http://nhcp.gov.ph/revolutions-and-exodus-of-the-spanish-colonies-in-albay-camarines-sur-and-masbate/