SCHOOL OF TEACHER EDUCATION AND LIBERAL ARTS

RPHIST 1 READINGS IN
PHILIPPINE HISTORY

Prepared by:

BEATRIZ R. CORPUZ-DUMO, PhD.

A Self-regulated Learning Module
BEVERLY B. LALTOOG, MPA

A Self-regulated Learning Module 1

NICANOR J. BASTIAN JR., MPA
Internal Criticism
 Refers to the accuracy of the content of a document
 It looks at the truthfulness and factuality of the evidence by looking at the author of the source, its
context, and the agenda behinds its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and its intended
purpose (Candelaria and Alporha, 2018).
 The problem of credibility
 Relevant particulars in the documents – is it credible?
 Test of Credibility
o Identification of the author
 To determine his reliability; personal attitudes
o Determination of the approximate date
 Handwriting, signature, seal
o Ability to tell the truth
 Nearness to the event, competence of witness, degree of attention
o Willingness to tell the truth
 To determine if the author consciously or unconsciously tells falsehood
o Corroboration
 i.e. historical facts – particulars which rest upon the independent testimony of two or
more reliable witnesses
 Questions to ponder:
• What was meant by the author?
• How much credibility can be given to the author?
• What was the author trying to say?
• How could the author’s word be interpreted?
• Does the document contain bias of any sort?

COLONIAL HISTORIOGRAPHY
The development of Philippine historiography can be traced back during the Spanish period.
The early friars with their zeal to propagate Christianity studied the cultures of the early Filipinos and
faithfully recorded their valuable observations. Although the writings of the early friars were basically
missionary history, their recorded observations on the life of the early Filipinos are indispensable in the
understanding of the Philippine pass. Since the early historians were Spanish friars, their accounts
were focused on the Spanish history of the Philippines specifically their missionary experience in the
country. Although their accounts contained biases against the early Filipinos, the information they
provided can be used by Filipino historians to correct the mistakes committed by early historians.
Contemporary historians can use a postcolonial reading on the documents to eliminate the colonial

bias. In this way, the myths that were written by the chroniclers regarding the Filipinos and their culture
can be corrected.
A Self-regulated Learning Module 16
 The writings of history during the Spanish period were not confined to the hands of the friars.
The secular historians during the Spanish period can be divided into the following:
a. Spanish officials in the Islands;
b. Foreign residents and writers; and the
c. Filipino Ilustrado

Learning from the fate of its colonial predecessor, the United States did not only use brute force but
also effected ingenious ways of pacification such as the use of education as a tool to control their subjects and
increase political and economic power of the elite few. These colonial instruments were so ingrained among
Filipinos that they perceived their colonial past in two ways: initially maltreated by “wicked Spain” but later
rescued by “benevolent America.” This kind of historical consciousness has effectively erased from the
memories of Filipino generations the bloody Filipino-American War as exemplified by the Balangiga Massacre
in Eastern Samar and the Battle of Bud Bagsak in Sulu. Consequently, such perception breathes new life to
the two part view of history: a period of darkness before the advent of the United States and an era of
enlightenment during the American colonial administration. This view has resonated with Filipino scholars even
after the Americans granted our independence in 1946.
The writing of history during the American period can be considered better compared to the writings of
history during the Spanish period. Although, most of the writings were extremely biased, still there were few
Americans who wrote in favour of the Filipinos. Historians during this period can be classified into Filipino
Ilustrado, American colonial officials, non-colonial officials and the so-called academic historians.

PHILIPPINE HISTORIOGRAPHY AFTER WORLD WAR II

The stark reality of Filipino historians thinking like their colonial counterparts during the postcolonial
period troubled a small group of professors and cultural workers who were mostly alumni of the University of
the Philippines. This spurred the emergence of Filipino scholars who challenged the narrow view of colonial
narratives and developed historical writing from the viewpoint of a nationalist agenda.

1.Teodoro Agoncillo
In the 1950s, Teodoro Agoncillo pioneered nationalist historiography in the
country by highlighting the role of the Filipino reformists and revolutionaries from 1872, the
year that saw the execution of the GomBurZa priests, to the end of the Philippine
Revolution as a focal point of the country’s nation-building narrative. Two of his most
celebrated books focus on the impact of the Philippine Revolution: The Revolt of the
Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan (1956) and Malolos: The Crisis of the
Republic (1960).His writings veered away from emphasizing colonial period and regarded
events before 1872 as part of the country’s “lost history.” He argued that what where
written in the documents before 1872 are the history of old Spain in the Philippines. For
Agoncillo, we cannot see a substantive role of the Filipinos in history because Filipinos before 1872 were
passive followers of the Spaniards.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 17

2. Renato Constantino
he discourse of “lost history” was not accepted by another known scholar, Renato
Constantino, whose published work entitled, “The Miseducation of the Filipino” became a
staple reading for academics and activists beginning in the late 1960s. Constantino
advanced the idea of a “people’s history” – a study of the past that sought to analyze
society by searching out people’s voices from colonial historical materials that typically
rendered Filipinos as decadent, inept and vile. Following this mode of historical inquiry, he
authored The Philippines: A Past Revisited (1975), a college textbook that offered a more
critical reading of Philippine history compared to Agoncillo’s History of the Filipino People
(1973). Undoubtedly, these two nationalist scholars inspired or challenged other historians
to re-evaluate the country’s national history.
Constantino defined history as the collective people’s struggle towards the full realization of freedom
and liberty. He emphasized that the real mover of history are the masses and superman does not exist only
leaders who became great because they were working with the people.

3. Zeus Salazar
Other Filipino historians set new directions in redefining Philippine historiography
in the last 30 years of the 20th century. The first of these scholars is Zeus Salazar who
conceptualized “Pantayong Pananaw” as an approach to understanding the past from
our own cultural frame and language. He emphasized the value of our Austronesian roots
in defining Filipino culture and encouraged other scholars to conduct outstanding
historical researches in Filipino such as the work of Jaime Veneracion’s Kasaysayan ng
Bulacan (1986).
The Pantayong Pananaw has opened new venues and themes for historians to
study like the world view of the indigenous, anting-anting, symbolic representation, reduccion, and other
themes that discuss the culture of the Filipinos. In this regard, new methodologies and concepts were utilized
like ethnography and folk literature.

4. Reynaldo Ileto
Equally important is the contribution of Reynaldo Ileto who wrote about his“history
from below”treatise in his ground-breaking work, Pasyon and Revolution: Popular
Movements in the Philippines, 1840-1910 (1979). In this work, Ileto endeavored to
recognize the way of thinking of ordinary folks by using alternative historical sources such
as folk songs and prayers. His other works spurred new interpretations such as common
topics such as Jose Rizal, Philippine-American War, and American colonization.
For Ileto, it is proper for historians to look into the other center of power, i.e. folk,
healer, cults, tulisanes, and columns. In doing this, historians will be able to present the
other side of history that were muted by the dominant historiography. The book of Reynaldo Ileto’s ”Pasyon
and Revolucion” can be considered as a turning point in the history of Philippine historical writing. He opened
new venues that can be used by scholars in their research.

5. Samuel Tan
There is also Samuel Tan, another prolific historian who is best remembered for mainstreaming the
role and relevance of Filipino Muslims in the country’s national history. His definitive work, The Filipino Muslim
Armed Struggle, 1900-1972 (1978),sought to examine the struggle of Filipino Muslims in the context of 20th

A Self-regulated Learning Module

century nation-building dynamics during the American colonial regime and subsequent postcolonial Filipino
administrations. In his book, A History of the Philippines (1987), Tan attempted to write a national history
reflective of the historical experiences not only of lowland Christianized Filipinos but also of the other cultural
communities in the archipelago.

CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTEMPORARY PHILIPPINE HISTORIOGRAPHY

a. Political Narratives
Most of our national histories today favour narratives that deal with the political aspects of
nation-building such as the legacies of political leaders and establishment of different governments.

b. Colonial Histories in Historical Narratives

Another weakness of most national histories is the importance given to colonial histories. This
continues to breed Filipinos who are more familiar with stories about our colonial history rather than
stories of our pre-colonial past.
Up to now, some social studies textbooks misrepresent ancient Filipinos as savages or
barbarians by portraying colonizers, especially the Spaniards and Americans, as liberators of the
Filipinos from cultural backwardness. The key to uncover such cultural prejudices is to examine
available historical sources and to write about our past by understanding the myths and misconceptions
that characterize the Filipino culture for centuries.

c. Elite-centric Perspectives in Historical Narratives

Some historical narratives focus on the contribution of the elite in nation-building such as what
the ilustrados (educated Filipinos) fought for in the 19th century or how local politicians negotiated with
their American counterparts to obtain an independence law during the first half of the 20th
century.Though eminent historians such as Constantino and Ileto reiterated the importance of a
“people’s history” and “history from below,” respectively, so much has to be done in terms of writing
about the roles played by ordinary people in our country.

d. Patriarchal Orientation in Historical Narratives

Most of the country’s historical narratives highlight the heroism of men in different ways: leading
revolts and liberation wars against colonizers, championing the cause of independence, and
spearheading political and economic development.

e. Emphasis on Lowland Christianized Filipinos

National histories tend to show partially toward lowland Christianized Filipinos at the expense of
other national cultural communities such as Muslim Filipinos and other indigenous peoples. Celebrated
figures of our past are all lowlander Christians and predominantly Tagalogs including Jose Rizal, the
leading propagandist; Andres Bonifacio, the Katipunan founder; and Emilio Aguinaldo, the revolutionary
leader who declared independence. Non-Christians and highlanders remain unrecognized in historical
narratives. Muslim Filipinos, in particular, have been subjected to negative characterization by lowland
Christians in published works such as history books. This is caused by the culture of mistrust that
developed between Christians and Muslims during colonial periods. Muslim Filipinos are depicted as
brutal, cruel, ferocious, and vicious as exemplified by their attacks of Christian towns. This narrow-
minded view has to be re-evaluated in order to correct misrepresentations of Muslim Filipinos in this

A Self-regulated Learning Module

 age of political correctness and cultural sensitivity.

S o m e K e y Co n cep t s to R e m e m b e r

 History  Secondary sources

 Historiography  External Criticism
 Anachronism  Internal Criticism
 Primary Sources  “Lost history”

A Self-regulated Learning Module 22

LESSON 1: MANUNGGUL JAR

The Manunggul Jar dated back to around 710-890 BCE. It was discovered in 1964 in
Manunggul Cave in Palawan. The jar’s cover has two human figures riding on a boat. The human figure
at the back is holding a paddle with both hands while the one in front has its two arms crossed against
the chest. The boat also has eyes and mouth. The upper portion of the jar has curved scrolls.
Archaeological findings show that this jar was used for secondary burial, a prehistoric burial practice
wherein only the bones were put in a jar within a year after the death of a person. The bones were
washed and painted with a red hematite as part of the preparatory practices for secondary burial. The
jar was then placed in the most lighted and attractive part inside the cave. (Source:
http://philmuseaum.tripod.com/archaeo.html (last accessed on 16 January 2013)

THE MANUNGGUL JAR AS A VESSEL OF HISTORY

by: Michael Charleston B. Chua
(Lifted from http://www.artesdelasfilipinas.com/archives/50/the-manunggul-jar-as-a-vessel-of-history)

"…the work of an artist and master potter."--Robert Fox

27th April 1995—I was 11 years old when I visited the National Museum -- the repository of our cultural,
natural and historical heritage. I remembered the majesty of climbing those steps and walking past the Neo-
classical Roman columns until I was inside the Old Congress Building.

Today, if the Metropolitan Museum’s identifying piece was the painting Virgenes Cristianas Expuestas Al
Populacho by Felix Resurrecion Hidaldo and the GSIS Museum its Parisian Life by the painter Juan Luna, the
National Museum’s, El Spoliarium, Luna’s most famous piece. Many people come to the museum just for this
painting. But another less-popular but quite significant piece was the Manunggul jar.

The Manunggul jar was one of the numerous jars found in a cave believed to be a burial site (Manunggul, was
part of the archaeologically significant Tabon Cave Complex in Lipuun Point, Quezon, Palawan) that was
discovered on March 1964 by Victor Decalan, Hans Kasten and other volunteer workers from the United States
Peace Corps. The Manunggul burial jar was unique in all respects. Dating back to the late Neolithic Period
(around 710 B.C.), Robert Fox described the jar in his landmark work on the Tabon Caves:

The burial jar with a cover featuring a ship-of-the-dead is perhaps unrivalled in Southeast Asia; the work of an
artist and master potter. This vessel provides a clear example of a cultural link between the archaeological past
and the ethnographic present. The boatman is steering rather than padding the "ship." The mast of the boat
was not recovered. Both figures appear to be wearing a band tied over the crown of the head and under the
jaw; a pattern still encountered in burial practices among the indigenous peoples in Southern Philippines. The
manner in which the hands of the front figure are folded across the chest is also a widespread practice in the
Islands when arranging the corpse.

The carved prow and eye motif of the spirit boat is still found on the traditional watercraft of the Sulu
Archipelago, Borneo and Malaysia. Similarities in the execution of the ears, eyes, nose, and mouth of the
figures may be seen today in the woodcarving of Taiwan, the Philippines, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia.

My familiarity with the Manunggul jar was spurred by the image in the PHP1,000 bill, circulated in 1995.

A Self-regulated Learning Module

Viewing the artifact up close fascinated me tremendously. I saw the artistry of the early Filipinos reflected in
those fine lines and intricate designs. We were definitely not as dumb as the Spaniards told us we were!

After a few years, when I took a cultural history subject during my undergraduate course in UP Diliman under
Dr. Bernadette Lorenzo-Abrera, the Manunggul jar was given a whole new meaning. When an archaeological
find was explained anthropologically, it was imbibed with far-reaching implications in re-writing its history.

The Manunggul jar served as a proof of our common heritage with our Austronesian-speaking ancestors
despite the diversity of cultures of the Philippine peoples. Traces of their culture and beliefs were seen in
different parts of the country and from different Philippine ethno-linguistic groups.

It was also a testament of the importance of the waters to our ancestors. The seas and the rivers were their
conduit of trade, information and communication. According to Peter Bellwood, the Southeast Asians first
developed a sophisticated maritime culture which made possible the spread of the Austronesian-speaking
peoples to the Pacific Islands as far Madagascar in Africa and Easter Island near South America. Our ships—
the balanghay, the paraw, the caracoa, and the like—were considered marvelous technological advances by
our neighbors that they respected us and made us partners in trade. These neighbors later then, grew to
include the imperial Chinese.

Many epics around the Philippines would tell us of how souls go to the next life aboard boats, passing through
the rivers and seas. The belief was very much connected with the Austronesia belief in the anito. Our
ancestors believed that man is composed of the body, the life force called the ginhawa, and the kaluluwa
(soul). The kaluluwa, after death, can return to earth to exist in nature and guide their descendants. This
explained why the cover of the Manunggul jar featured three faces: the soul, the boat driver, and of the boat
itself. For them, even things from nature have souls and lives of their own. That’s why our ancestors respected
nature more than those who thought that it can be used for the ends of man.

Seeing the Manunggul jar once more, I was also reminded of the inventiveness of the early Filipinos as well as
the concepts and values they hold most-- their concept of the soul, for example, are believed to exist only
on good-natured and merciful people. The belief was that the soul gave life, mind, and will to a person and if
this was what our ancestors valued and exemplified, then our nation was not only great, but lived by
compassionate people.

However, the colonial masters in the past labeled our ancestors no good and even tried to erase our legacies
and values, and despite the media today showing how shameful, miserable and poor our country is, from time
to time there would be people who echo the same values that our ancestors lived by.

In the 1890s, the Katipunan movement of Andres Bonifacio, which spearheaded the Philippine Revolution,
tried to revive the values of magandang kalooban. During the People Power Uprising in1986, we showed the
world the values of pananampalataya, pakikipagkapwa, pakikiramay, pagiging masiyahin, bayanihan, pagiging
mapayapa, and pagiging malikhain --values that were deeply rooted in the Filipino culture. It was the country's
national hero, José Rizal, who once wrote, in his essay, Filipinas Dentro de Cien Años, (The Philippines Within
a Century) that:

With the new men that will spring from her bosom and the remembrance of the past, she will perhaps enter
openly the wide road of progress and all will work jointly to strengthen the mother country at home as well as
abroad with the same enthusiasm with which a young man returns to cultivate his father’s farmland so long
devastated and abandons due to the negligence of those who had alienated it. And free once more, like the
bird that leaves his cage, like the flower that returns to the open air, they will discover their good old qualities
which they are losing little by little and again become lovers of peace, gay, lively, smiling, hospitable, and
fearless.

A Self-regulated Learning Module

The Manunggul jar was a symbol of the National Museum’s important role in spearheading the preservation
the cultural heritage—pamana—using multi-disciplinary techniques. It was a testament of how art can be a
vessel of history and culture with the help of scholars. In this light, a simple jar became the embodiment of the
history, experiences, and aspirations of the people and how the values of maka-Diyos, makatao at makabansa
became part the value system of the Filipinos.

I have visited the manunggul jar numerous times since that April of 1995 at the Kaban ng Lahi room of the
National Museum II—The Museum of the Filipino People (former Department of Finance Building). Everytime, I
look at it I am reminded of how great and compassionate the Filipinos are and how I could never be ashamed
of being a Filipino. Everytime I look at the Manunggul jar, I see a vision that a new generation of Filipinos will
once more take the ancient balanghay as a people and be horizon seekers once more.

TASK1: Complete the following concept map (40 points)

Beliefs
Discovery of represented in
the Jar the Jar

_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________Source: https://www.nationalmuseum.gov.ph
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________

Purpose of
Description
the Jar
of the Jar

_________________________________ a. To the early Filipino people

_________________________________ __________________________
_________________________________ __________________________
_________________________________ _________________________
_________________________________ b. Present generation
_________________________________ __________________________
_________________________________ __________________________
_________________________________
__________________________
_________________________________
__________________________
_________________________________
__________________________
_________________________________
 TASK2. ESSAY: Explain the meaning of “Manunggul Jar as a Vessel of History.” (20 points)

________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________

15 10 5 1

Complete Explanation of topic Partial or incomplete Inadequate

explanation of topic, is satisfactory, with explanation of topic, explanation of topic
CONTENT with specific, mostly sufficient with insufficient with inadequate or
accurate, and evidence, but evidence and missing evidence
relevant information. mostly general. inaccuracies and many factual
More detail needed. errors
Some factual errors

5 3 2 1

Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

ORGANIZATION logical, interesting information in difficulty following information is
sequence which logical sequence work because difficult to follow
reader can follow. which reader can student jumps
follow. around

LESSON 2: BATTLE OF MACTAN

Read the narrative of Antonio Pigafetta about the events that occurred on that fateful day of April 27, 1521.

Carlos V. Francisco Watercolor Stock

A Self-regulated Learning Module 26

 On Friday, April 26, Zula, a chief of the island of Matan, sent one of his sons to present two goats to the
captain-general, and to say that he would send him all that he had promised, but that he had not been
able to send it to him because of the other chief Cilapulapu, who refused to obey the king of Spagnia.
He requested the captain to send him only one boatload of men on the next night, so that they might
help him and fight against the other chief. The captain-general decided to go thither with three
boatloads. We begged him repeatedly not to go, but he, like a good shepherd, refused to abandon his
flock. At midnight, 60 men of us set out armed with corselets and helmets, together with . . .some of the
chief men. . .We reached Matan three hours before dawn. The captain did not wish to fight then, but
sent a message to the natives. . .to the effect that if they would obey the king of Spagnia, recognize the
Christian king as their sovereign, and pay us our tribute, he would be their friend; but if they wish
otherwise, they should wait to see our lances wounded. They replied that if we had our lances they had
lances of bamboo and stakes hardened with fire. [They asked us] not to proceed to attack them at
once; but to wait until morning, so that they might have more men. They said that in order to induce us
to go in search of them; for they had dug certain pit holes between the houses in order that we might
fall into them. When morning came, 49 of us leaped into the water up to our thighs and walked through
water for more than two crossbow flights before we could reach the shore. The boats could not
approach thereafter because of certain rocks in the water. The other eleven men remained behind to
guard the boats. When we reached land, those men had formed in three divisions to the number of
more than 1500 persons. When they saw us, they charged down upon us with exceeding loud cries,
two divisions on our flanks and the other on our front. When the captain saw that, he formed us into two
divisions, and thus did we begin to fight. The musketeers and crossbowmen shot from a distance for
about half-hour, but uselessly, for the shots only passed through the shields which were made of thin
wood and the arms (of the bearers.)
The captain cried to them, ”Cease firing! Cease firing! But his order was not at all heeded.
When the natives saw that we were shooting our muskets to no purpose, crying out they determined to
stand firm, but they redoubled their shouts. When our muskets were discharged, the natives would
never stand still, but leaped hither and thither, covering themselves with their shields. They shot so
many arrows at us and hurled so many bamboo spears (some of them tipped with iron) at the captain-
general, besides pointed stakes hardened with fire, stones and mud, that we could scarcely defend
ourselves. Seeing that, the captain-general sent some men to burn their houses in order to terrify
them. When they saw their houses burning, they were roused to greater fury. Two of our men were
killed near the houses, while we burned 20 or 30 houses. So many of them charged down upon us
that they shot the captain through the right leg with a poisoned arrow. On that account, he ordered us
to retire slowly, but the men took to flight, except 6 or 8 of us who remained with the captain. The
natives shot only at our legs, for the latter were bare; and so many were the spears and stones that
they hurled at us, that we could offer no resistance. The mortars in the boats could not aid us as they
were too far away. . .
The natives continued to pursue us, and picking up the same spear four or six times, hurled it at us again and
again. Recognizing the captain, so many turned upon him that they knocked his helmet off his head twice, but he
always stood firmly like a good knight, together with some others. . .An Indian hurled a bamboo spear into the
captain’s face, but the latter immediately killed him with his lance, which he left in the Indian’s body. Then, trying to
lay hand on sword, he could draw it out but halfway, because he had been wounded in the arm with a bamboo spear.
When the natives saw that, they all hurled themselves upon him. One of them wounded him on the leg with a large
cutlass. .. That caused the captain to fall face downward, when immediately they rushed upon him with iron and
bamboo spears and with their cutlasses, until they killed our mirror, our light, our comfort, and our true
guide. When they wounded him, he turned back many times to see whether we were all in the boats.
Thereupon, beholding him dead, we, wounded, retreated, as best we could, to the boats, which were
already pulling off.

Source: Pigafetta, Antonio. “First Voyage Around the World.” In the Philippine Islands, Vol. 33, edited by E. Blair and J.
Robertson, 175, 177, 179, 181. Cleveland: A.H. Clark, 1909. Reprinted by Cacho Hermanos, 1973

TASK1: Make a timeline of what happened on 27 April 1521 from the point of view of the
Spaniards.(20 pts.)

DATE/TIME EVENTS

A Self-regulated Learning Module

 TASK2. Make a Contextual (PEST) Analysis on the Battle of Mactan by completing the chart below.
(20 pts.)

CONTEXTUAL (PEST) ANALYSIS

Geography Economy Social Technology

Based from the PEST Analysis, what do you think is the reason/are the reasons why the group of Magellan
was defeated? (20 points)
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

15 10 5 1

Complete Explanation of topic Partial or incomplete Inadequate

explanation of topic, is satisfactory, with explanation of topic, explanation of topic
CONTENT with specific, mostly sufficient with insufficient with inadequate or
accurate, and evidence, but evidence and missing evidence
relevant information. mostly general. inaccuracies and many factual
More detail needed. errors
Some factual errors

5 3 2 1

Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

ORGANIZATION logical, interesting information in difficulty following information is
sequence which logical sequence work because difficult to follow
reader can follow. which reader can student jumps
follow. around

A Self-regulated Learning Module 29

LESSON 3: ACT OF DECLARATION OF PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE

Read the Act of Declaration of Philippine Independence written and read by Ambrocio Rianzares-
Bautista on June 12, 1898 at Cavite el Viejo (Kawit).

Proclamation of Philippine Independence in Kawit Cavite on June 12 1898

Ambrocio Rianzares-
Bautista

In the town of Cavite-Viejo, Province of Cavite, this 12 th day of June 1898: BEFORE ME,
Ambrocio Rianzares-Bautista, War Counsellor and Special Delegate designated to proclaim and
solemnize this Declaration of Independence by the Dictatorial Government of the Philippines, pursuant
to, and by virtue of, a Decree issued by the Egregious Dictator Don Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy. . .

And having as witness to the rectitude of our intentions the Supreme Judge of the Universe, and
under the protection of the Powerful and Humanitarian Nation, the United States of America, we do
hereby proclaim and declare solemnly, in the name and by authority of the people of those Philippine
Islands. That they are and have the right to be free and independent; that they have ceased to have
any allegiance to the Crown of Spain; that all political ties between them are and should be completely
severed and annulled; and that, like other free and independent States, they enjoy the full power to
make War and Peace, conclude commercial treaties, enter into alliances, regulate commerce, and do
all other acts and things which an independent State has a right to do. . .And imbued with firm
confidence in Divine Providence, we hereby mutually bind ourselves to support this Declaration with our
lives, our fortunes, and with our most sacred possession, our Honor.

We recognize, approve, and ratify, with all the orders emanating from the same, the Dictatorship
established by Don Emilio Aguinaldo whom we revere as the Supreme Head of this Nation, which today
begins to have a life of its own, in the conviction that he has been the instrument chosen by God inspite
of his humble origin, to effectuate the redemption of this unfortunate country as foretold by Dr. Don
Jose Rizal in his magnificent verses which he composed in his prison cell prior to his execution,
liberating it from the Yoke of Spanish domination. .

Moreover, we confer upon our famous Dictator Don Emilio Aguinaldo all the powers necessary
to enable him to discharge the duties of Government, including the prerogatives of granting pardon and

A Self-regulated Learning Module 30

amnesty.

And lastly, it was resolved unanimously that this Nation, already free and independent as of this
day, must use the same flag which up to now is being used, whose design and colors are found
described in the attached drawing, the white triangle signifying the distinctive emblem of the famous
Society of the Katipunan which by means of blood compact inspired the masses to rise in revolution;
the three stars, signifying the three principal islands of this Archipelago – Luzon, Mindanao and Panay
where this revolutionary movement started; the sun representing the gigantic steps made by the sons
of the country along the path of Progress and Civilization; the eight rays, signifying the eight provinces
– Manila, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna, and Batangas – which declared
themselves in a state of war as soon as the first revolt was initiated; and the colors of Blue, Red, and
White, commemorating the flag of the United States of America, as a manifestation of our profound
gratitude towards this Great Nation for its disinterested protection which it lent us and continues lending
us. . .

In witness thereof, I certify that this Act of Declaration of Independence was signed by me and
by all people here as assembled including the only stranger who attended those proceedings, a citizen
of the U.S.A., Mr. L. M. Johnson, a Colonel of Artillery.
Source: “Declaration of Philippine Independence.” In The Laws of the First Philippine Republic (The Laws of Malolos), edited
by Sulpicio Guevara, 203-206. Manila: National Historical Commission, 1972

TASK: Answer the following questions briefly.

1. Who is Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista? Give three significant facts about him.

a. _______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
b. _______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
c. ________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________

2. What does the document want to convey? (10 points)

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

3. How did the Filipinos regard the United States of America based on the
document? (5 points) What is your stand on this? Do you agree with the Filipinos the way they looked at
the Americans? (15 points)
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

A Self-regulated Learning Module

 ___________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________

4. What is the importance of this document in the history of our country? (10 points)
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

S o m e K e y Te r m s a n d N a m e s to R e m e m b e r

 Antonio Pigafetta  Manunggul Jar

 Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista  Philippine Independence
 Cilapulapi  Battle of Mactan

TASK1. Compare and contrast the past and present meanings that we attach to the symbols
and colors of the Philippine flag. Your output will be graded based on accuracy of information.
(30 points)

PAST PRESENT
(based from the Act of Declaration of Philippine
Independence)

A Self-regulated Learning Module 32

 TASK 2. POSITION PAPER. Read the following issues and write 500-1000 words position paper
about it.
(70 points)

Issue #1. Sen. Pacquiao files a bill proposing 9th ray in sun in PH flag
(https://mb.com.ph/2021/01/30/sen-pacquiao-files-bill-proposing-9th-ray-in-sun-in-ph-flag/)

Issue #2. Tolentino proposes to add fourth star to PH flag

(https://mb.com.ph/2019/06/13/tolentino-proposes-to-add-fourth-star-to-ph-flag/)

Issue #3. Sotto wants Philippine national anthem revised (https://news.abs-

cbn.com/news/09/19/18/sotto-wants-philippine-national-anthem-revised)

NAME of STUDENT: _________________________ SCORE: ________/50__

SCHEDULE and SECTION: ___________________ DATE: ___________

CRITERIA 10 7 5 3
Score
Attention The introductory The introductory The author has an The introductory
Grabber paragraph has a paragraph has a interesting paragraph is not
strong hook or hook or attention introductory interesting AND is
attention grabber grabber, but it is paragraph but the not relevant to the
that is appropriate weak, rambling or connection to the topic.
/10
for the audience. inappropriate for topic is not clear.
This could be a the audience.
strong statement, a
relevant quotation,
statistic, or question
addressed to the
reader.
Focus or The thesis The thesis statement The thesis The thesis
Thesis statement clearly names the topic of statement outlines statement does not
Statement names the topic of the essay. The some or all of the name the topic AND
the essay and author'sposition is main points to be does not preview /10
outlines the main stated discussed but does what will be
points to be not name the topic. discussed.
discussed. The
author's position is
strongly and clearly
stated.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 33

Support for Includes 3 or more Includes 3 or more Includes 2 pieces of Includes 1 or fewer
Position pieces of evidence pieces of evidence evidence (facts, pieces of evidence
(x2) (facts, statistics, (facts, statistics, statistics, examples, (facts, statistics,
examples, real-life examples, real-life real-life experiences) examples, real-life
experiences) that experiences) that that support the experiences).
/20
support the position support the position positionstatement.
statement. The statement.
writer anticipates the
reader's concerns,
biases or arguments
and has provided at
least 1 counter-
argument.
Sequencing Arguments and Arguments and A few of the Many of the
support are support are supportdetails or
support details or
providedin a provided in a fairly arguments are not
arguments are not
logical order that logical order that in an expected or
in an expected or /10
makes it easy and makes it logical order,logical order,
interesting to reasonably easy distracting the
distracting the
follow the author's tofollow the reader and making
reader and making
train of thought. author's train of the essay
the essay seem a
thought. seemvery
little confusing.
confusing.
Writing Piece is clearly Author paid Errors may be Errors make it
Mechanics written with no attention to writing present and may difficult to read
grammar, spelling, conventions; slightly take away and/or
punctuation, or Minorerrors do not from the clarity; yet, understandthe /10
capitalization distract from the writer’s paper.
errors. meaning. meaning can be
determined.
Closing The conclusion The conclusion is The author's There is no
Paragraph is strong and recognizable. The position is restated conclusion -
leavesthe reader author's position within the closing thepaper just
solidly isrestated within paragraph, but not ends.
understanding thefirst two near the beginning. /10
thewriter's sentencesof the The essay body is
position. Effective closing paragraph not summarized.
restatement of and is followed by
theposition a summary of the
statementbegins essay body.
the closing
paragraph and is
followed by an
effective
summaryof the
essay body.

TOTAL SCORE /50

A Self-regulated Learning Module 34

ASSIGNMENT: Revisit Corazon Aquino’s speech before the U.S. Congress during the joint session and was
delivered at Washington D.C. on September 18, 1986.
1. Read the transcript of her speech or you can also watch it as
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZnnvbKyNCQ[/youtube.
2. Write an ESSAY discussing the (1) importance of the text, (2) the background of the author, (3) the
context of the document, and (4) the text’s contribution to understanding Philippine history

Speech
of
Her Excellency Corazon C. Aquino
President of the Philippines
During the Joint Session of the United States Congress

Three years ago, I left America in grief to bury my husband, Ninoy Aquino. I thought I had left it also to lay to
rest his restless dream of Philippine freedom. Today, I have returned as the president of a free people.

In burying Ninoy, a whole nation honored him. By that brave and selfless act of giving honor, a nation in shame
recovered its own. A country that had lost faith in its future found it in a faithless and brazen act of murder. So
in giving, we receive, in losing we find, and out of defeat, we snatched our victory.

For the nation, Ninoy became the pleasing sacrifice that answered their prayers for freedom. For myself and
our children, Ninoy was a loving husband and father. His loss, three times in our lives, was always a deep and
painful one.

Fourteen years ago this month was the first time we lost him. A president-turned-dictator, and traitor to his
oath, suspended the Constitution and shut down the Congress that was much like this one before which I am
honored to speak. He detained my husband along with thousands of others – senators, publishers and anyone
who had spoken up for the democracy as its end drew near. But for Ninoy, a long and cruel ordeal was
reserved. The dictator already knew that Ninoy was not a body merely to be imprisoned but a spirit he must
break. For even as the dictatorship demolished one by one the institutions of democracy – the press, the
Congress, the independence of the judiciary, the protection of the Bill of Rights – Ninoy kept their spirit alive in
himself.

The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked him up in a tiny, nearly airless cell
in a military camp in the north. They stripped him naked and held the threat of sudden midnight execution over
his head. Ninoy held up manfully–all of it. I barely did as well. For 43 days, the authorities would not tell me
what had happened to him. This was the first time my children and I felt we had lost him.

When that didn’t work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder and a host of other crimes before a military
commission. Ninoy challenged its authority and went on a fast. If he survived it, then, he felt, God intended him
for another fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back from his determination to see his fast
through to the end. He stopped only when it dawned on him that the government would keep his body alive

A Self-regulated Learning Module

after the fast had destroyed his brain. And so, with barely any life in his body, he called off the fast o n the
fortieth day. God meant him for other things, he felt. He did not know that an early death would still be his fate,
that only the timing was wrong.

At any time during his long ordeal, Ninoy could have made a separate peace with the dictatorship, as so many
of his countrymen had done. But the spirit of democracy that inheres in our race and animates this chamber
could not be allowed to die. He held out, in the loneliness of his cell and the frustration of exile, the democratic
alternative to the insatiable greed and mindless cruelty of the right and the purging holocaust of the left.
And then, we lost him, irrevocably and more painfully than in the past. The news came to us in Boston. It had
to be after the three happiest years of our lives together. But his death was my country’s resurrection in the
courage and faith by which alone they could be free again. The dictator had called him a nobody. Two million
people threw aside their passivity and escorted him to his grave. And so began the revolution that has brought
me to democracy’s most famous home, the Congress of the United States.

The task had fallen on my shoulders to continue offering the democratic alternative to our people.

Archibald Macleish had said that democracy must be defended by arms when it is attacked by arms and by
truth when it is attacked by lies. He failed to say how it shall be won.

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

The people vindicated me in an election shamefully marked by government thuggery and fraud. The opposition
swept the elections, garnering a clear majority of the votes, even if they ended up, thanks to a corrupt
Commission on Elections, with barely a third of the seats in parliament. Now, I knew our power.
Last year, in an excess of arrogance, the dictatorship called for its doom in a snap election. The people
obliged. With over a million signatures, they drafted me to challenge the dictatorship. And I obliged them. The
rest is the history that dramatically unfolded on your television screen and across the front pages of your
newspapers.

You saw a nation, armed with courage and integrity, stand fast by democracy against threats and corru ption.
You saw women poll watchers break out in tears as armed goons crashed the polling places to steal the ballots
but, just the same, they tied themselves to the ballot boxes.

You saw a people so committed to the ways of democracy that they were prepared to give their lives for its
pale imitation. At the end of the day, before another wave of fraud could distort the results, I announced the
people’s victory.

The distinguished co-chairman of the United States observer team in his report to your President described
that victory:

A Self-regulated Learning Module

“I was witness to an extraordinary manifestation of democracy on the part of the Filipino people. The ultimate
result was the election of Mrs. Corazon C. Aquino as President and Mr. Salvador Laurel as Vice-President of
the Philippines.”

Many of you here today played a part in changing the policy of your country towards us. We, Filipinos, thank
each of you for what you did: for, balancing America’s strategic interest against human concerns, illuminates
the American vision of the world.

When a subservient parliament announced my opponent’s victory, the people turned out in the streets and
proclaimed me President. And true to their word, when a handful of military leaders declared themselves
against the dictatorship, the people rallied to their protection. Surely, the people take care of their own. It is on
that faith and the obligation it entails, that I assumed the presidency.

As I came to power peacefully, so shall I keep it. That is my contract with my people and my commitment to
God. He had willed that the blood drawn with the lash shall not, in my country, be paid by blood drawn by the
sword but by the tearful joy of reconciliation.
We have swept away absolute power by a limited revolution that respected the life and freedom of every
Filipino. Now, we are restoring full constitutional government. Again, as we restored democracy by the ways of
democracy, so are we completing the constitutional structures of our new democracy under a constitution that
already gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A jealously independent Constitutional Commission is completing
its draft which will be submitted later this year to a popular referendum. When it is approved, there will be
congressional elections. So within about a year from a peaceful but national upheaval that overturned a
dictatorship, we shall have returned to full constitutional government. Given the polarization and breakdown we
inherited, this is no small achievement.

My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist insurgency that numbered less than 500.
Unhampered by respect for human rights, he went at it hammer and tongs. By the time he fled, that insurgency
had grown to more than 16,000. I think there is a lesson here to be learned about trying to stifle a thing with the
means by which it grows.

I don’t think anybody, in or outside our country, concerned for a democratic and open Philippines, doubts what
must be done. Through political initiatives and local reintegration programs, we must seek to bring the
insurgents down from the hills and, by economic progress and justice, show them that for which the best
intentioned among them fight.

As President, I will not betray the cause of peace by which I came to power. Yet equally, and again no friend of
Filipino democracy will challenge this, I will not stand by and allow an insurgent leadership to spurn our offer of
peace and kill our young soldiers, and threaten our new freedom.

Yet, I must explore the path of peace to the utmost for at its end, whatever disappointment I meet there, is the
moral basis for laying down the olive branch of peace and taking up the sword of war. Still, should it come to
that, I will not waver from the course laid down by your great liberator: “With malice towards none, with charity
for all, with firmness in the rights as God gives us to see the rights, let us finish the work we are in, to bind up
the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and for his orphans, to

A Self-regulated Learning Module 37

do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.”

Like Lincoln, I understand that force may be necessary before mercy. Like Lincoln, I don’t relish it. Yet, I will do
whatever it takes to defend the integrity and freedom of my country.

Finally, may I turn to that other slavery: our $26 billion foreign debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet must
the means by which we shall be able to do so be kept from us? Many conditions imposed on the previous
government that stole this debt continue to be imposed on us who never benefited from it. And no assistance
or liberality commensurate with the calamity that was visited on us has been extended. Yet ours must have
been the cheapest revolution ever. With little help from others, we Filipinos fulfilled the first and most difficult
conditions of the debt negotiation the full restoration of democracy and responsible government. Elsewhere,
and in other times of more stringent world economic conditions, Marshall plans and their like were felt to be
necessary companions of returning democracy.

When I met with President Reagan yesterday, we began an important dialogue about cooperation and the
strengthening of the friendship between our two countries. That meeting was both a confirmation and a new
beginning and should lead to positive results in all areas of common concern.

Today, we face the aspirations of a people who had known so much poverty and massive unemployment for
the past 14 years and yet offered their lives for the abstraction o f democracy. Wherever I went in the
campaign, slum area or impoverished village, they came to me with one cry: democracy! Not food, although
they clearly needed it, but democracy. Not work, although they surely wanted it, but democracy. Not money, for
they gave what little they had to my campaign. They didn’t expect me to work a miracle that would instantly put
food into their mouths, clothes on their back, education in their children, and work that will put dignity in their
lives. But I feel the pressing obligation to respond quickly as the leader of a people so deserving of all these
things.

We face a communist insurgency that feeds on economic deterioration, even as we carry a great share of the
free world defenses in the Pacific. These are only two of the many burdens my people carry even as they try to
build a worthy and enduring house for their new democracy, that may serve as well as a redoubt for freedom in
Asia. Yet, no sooner is one stone laid than two are taken away. Half our export earnings, $2 billion out of $4
billion, which was all we could earn in the restrictive markets of the world, went to pay just the interest on a
debt whose benefit the Filipino people never received.

Still, we fought for honor, and, if only for honor, we shall pay. And yet, should we have to wring the payments
from the sweat of our men’s faces and sink all the wealth piled up by the bondsman’s two hundred fifty years of
unrequited toil?

Yet to all Americans, as the leader of a proud and free people, I address this question: has there been a
greater test of national commitment to the ideals you hold dear than that my people have gone through? You
have spent many lives and much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant to receive it. And
here you have a people who won it by themselves and need only the help to preserve it.

Three years ago, I said thank you, America, for the haven from oppression, and the home you gave Ninoy,
myself and our children, and for the three happiest years of our lives together. Today, I say, join us, America,

A Self-regulated Learning Module

as we build a new home for democracy, another haven for the oppressed, so it may stand as a shining
testament of our two nation’s commitment to freedom.

Source: https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1986/09/18/speech-of-president-corazon-aquino-during-the-joint-session-of-the-u-s-
congress-september-18-1986/

A Self-regulated Learning Module 39