GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

Readings
in
Philippine
History
 For SLSU use only!

1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
2

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Philippine History viewed from the lens of selected primary sources in different
periods, analysis and interpretations.
The course aims to expose students to different facets of Philippine history through
the lens of eyewitnesses. Rather than rely on secondary materials such as textbooks, which
is the usual approach in teaching Philippine history, different types of primary sources will be
used – written (qualitative and quantitative), oral, visual, audio-visual, digital – covering
various aspects of Philippine life (political, economic, social, cultural). Students are expected
to analyze the selected readings contextually and in term of content (stated and implied).
The end goal is to enable students to understand and appreciate our rich past by deriving
insights from those who were actually present at the time of the event.
Context analysis considers the following: 1) the historical context of the source (time
and place it was written and the situation at the time). 2) the author’s background, intent (to
the extent discernable), and authority on the subject and the source’s relevance and
meaning today.
Content analysis, on the other hand, applies appropriate techniques depending on
the type of source (written, oral, visual). In the process students will be asked, for example,
to identify the author’s main argument, compare point of view, identify biases, and evaluate
the author’s claim based on the evidences presented or other available evidence at the time.
The course will guide the students through their reading and analysis of the texts and
require them to write reaction essays of varied length and present their ideas in other ways.
The course analyzes Philippine history from multiple perspectives through the lens of
selected primary sources coming from various disciplines and of genres. The end goal is to
develop the historical and critical consciousness of the students so that they will become
versatile, articulate, broad minded, morally upright and responsible citizens.
This course includes mandatory topics on the Philippine Constitution, agrarian reform
and, taxation.

COURSE GUIDE
This module emphasizes the relevance of studying Philippine History form multiple
perspectives based on selected primary and secondary source. Each section consists of
variety of traditional and non-traditional activities and tasks that will truly aid you in
comprehensively understanding the topics.

This module is designed for you to learn the lessons independently, diligently and
intelligently. Make your learning process more exciting, work with your module page by
page, and avoid peeking on the discussions. The following guides will help you in every step
of the learning process.

1. Allocate and manage your time to read, understand every part of the module. You
can read the discussion over and over until you absorb the point. There is no
particular schedule in studying the course, but be mindful of the schedule
dates of submission of outputs (refer to the schedule guide)
2. There are announcements, discussion and activities that will be posted, so check
course site, and group chat or text messages.
3. Before you start doing the tasks, read and be mindful of the assessment tool and
the instructions. Always aim for the highest standard.

2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
3

4. Do not plagiarize. It is a crime you will be penalized. Do not copy

and paste. Quote your sources.
5. Announcements will be used to post course updates including changes to due
dates, reminders, and general course information. Be sure to check the
announcement tool as soon as you log into the course.
6. Lastly, if you have problems, questions and feedback don’t be shy to tell it to your
Instructor. You can send it through our course site, through:
✔ Email Add: historyador18@gmail.com
✔ Cell number: 09088832527. (I will be responding every MWF 8:00-11:00 AM
and TTH 1:00-4:00 PM)
a. When using email contact Please follow using the Subject: PROGRAM –
Course Code- Surname (e.g. ABHist-GEC03-DelaGracia- Activity1)
b. Please use proper spelling when contacting through messenger and email.
Please refrain from “text-talk”

SCHEDULE GUIDE
Module Topics N0. Of
Weeks

1 Meaning of Relevance of History 1-3

1. Distinction of primary and secondary sources
2. External and Internal Criticism
3. Comparative Analysis of Primary Sources
3.1 Santiago Alvarez,Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of
a General
Teodoro Agoncillo, History of the Filipino People

2 Content and contextual analysis of selected primary sources; 4 -6

identification of the historical importance of the text; and
examination of the author’s main argument and point of view
1. Customs of the Tagalogs, Juan de Plasencia
Emilio Jacinto, “Kartilla ng Katipunan”
3 Content and contextual analysis of selected primary 7-9
sources 1. Commission on Independence,
2. Filipino Grievances against General Wood. [Petition Letter 3.
Corazon Aquino, President Corazon Aquino’s Speech before the
U.S.
Congress Sept. 18, 1986 [Speech]

4 “One past but may histories”: Controversies and Conflicting Views 10-12
in Philippine history
1. Site of the First Mass
2. Cavite Mutiny
Cry of Balintawak or Pugadlawin

5 Agrarian Reform Policy and its Role to Philippine Development 13 -14

6 The Philippine Constitution and its Implications to Development 15 -16

7 Indigenous People’s (IP’s) status, issues and challenges 17 -18

MODULE AND EXAMINATION RETRIEVAL:

Submit Accomplished Activities, Performance Outcome on the following schedule:
Units 1 - 2 and Preliminary Exam ______________
Units 3 – 4 and Midterm Exam ________________
Units 5 – 7 and Final Exam _ _________________

3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
4

Module 1 The Meaning and Relevance of

History

Overview
Lesson 1 introduces history as a discipline and as a narrative. It discusses the
limitation of historical knowledge, history as the subjective process of re-
construction, and historical method and historiography. Lesson 2 presents
sources of historical date, the written and non-written sources of history, as well
as the differentiation of primary and secondary sources of information or
data. Lesson 2 discusses historical criticisms, the external and internal criticisms. It
explains how to evaluate primary and secondary sources materials. These are important
aspects in ascertaining the authenticity and credibility of primary sources upon which
narratives are crafted.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this module, you should be able to:
1. Define the meaning of history as an academic discipline and to be familiar with the
underlying philosophy and methodology of the discipline
 2. Identify the criteria in evaluating primary and secondary sources materials;
3. Assess primary and secondary source materials, and
4. Evaluate materials in terms of authenticity, credibility, and provenance

especially human affairs in

A. The Meaning of History chronological order. There are
theories constructed by historians
in investigating history: The
History is Factual history and the
derived from speculative history. Factual
the Greek history presents readers the plain
word and basic information vis-à-vis
Historia the events that took place (what),
which means the time and date with which the
Learning by inquiry. The Greek events happened (when), the
philosopher, Aristotle, looked upon place with which the events took
history as the systematic accounting place, and the people that were
of a set of natural phenomena, that is, involved (who). Speculative
taking into consideration the history, on the other hand, goes
chronological arrangement of the beyond facts because it’s
account. This explained that concerned about the reasons for
knowledge of derived through which events happed (why), and
conducting a process of scientific the way they happened (how)
investigation of past events. (Ligan, et.al.2018). it tries to
The word History is referred speculate on the cause and effect
usually for account of phenomena, of an event (Cantal, et.al., 2014).

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 5

meaning to a certain group of
people in a given time and place.
On the other hand, history from These two components are
the Filipino perspective term as inseparable. Without both you
kasaysayan, Ambeth Ocampo’s cannot have true history
definition has this to include: (Ocampo, 2013, p.xii).

Kasaysayan is rooted in two

words salaysay, which means a
narrative or a story and, more
important, saysay or meaning. In
my history classes, I always
propose the working definition of
kasaysayan or history as a
narrative (which can be written,
visual, oral or combination of all
three) about past events that has
 To Agoncillo, History is the
study of the relevant past. It is the
struggle of the Filipino people for
freedom. While Constantino, define it
as the history of the inarticulate.
Salazar, elicited that:

… itinatakda ng mga elit, na siyang “nag

aarticulate” ng kung ano ang “relevant
past,” batay sa kanilang pagka-akulturado
sa wika-at-kulturang banyaga. Nakatuon sa
nakaraang politikal (i.e., pagbaka o
The eminent historian Zeus resistance sa kolonyalismo, imperyalismo) at
hindi sa mga kultural at pagkalinangang
Salazar from the University of the katangiang Pilipino, dulot hindi lamang ng
Philippines has this definition “ang nabanggit na sa itaas kundi dahil na rin sa
paggamit lamang ng mga nakasulat n abatis
kasaysayan ay isang salaysay na may saysay
(i.e., written sources) na sulat ng mga
sa mga taong nagsasaysay” o “ang banyaga. Hindi gumamit ng mga hindi
kasaysayan ayisang salaysay hinggil sa nakasulat na batis. Gumagamit ng
peryodisasyon umiinog sa mga “historical
nakaraan na may saysay para sa markers” ng banyaga; PreColonial, Colonial,
sinsalsayang pangkat ng tao o salinlahi” post-colonial; prehistory, Spanish era,
American era, Japanese period, etc.
(Navarro, 2000, pp.11-12). Salazar’s
contribution to the definition of history
B. Sources of Historical Data
is couched on his
theoretical frame of What are Sources?
pantayong pananaw, which is
monumental for adds to the simple In conducting any
historical research, different sources of
definition of history as a systematic
information are required to gain
account of past events. The concept
extensive knowledge on a particular
of saysay or meaning is a major
topic. Some researchers rely on written
element for a narrative to qualify as sources while others choose to make use
historical account. A narrative of oral sources. No matter what source is
without meaning to the group of being utilized, it is important to know
people will never be history. which among the gathered sources can
provide accurate details and information

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 6

about the historical event or subject being
researched on.
The historian, however, has to use many
materials that are not in books. Where these
are archeological, epigraphical,
numismatical materials, he has to depend
largely on museums. Where there are official
etc. where there are private papers not
available in official collections, he may have
to hunt among the papers of business
houses, the muniment rooms of ancient
castles, the prized possessions of autograph
collectors, the records of parish church, etc.
or having some subject in mind, which more or
less definite delimitation of the persons,
areas, times, and functions (i.e., the

records, he may have to search for them in economic, political, intellectual, diplomatic,
archives, courthouses, government libraries, or other occupational aspects) involved, be
looks for materials that may have some
bearing upon those persons in that are at the
time they function in that fashion. These
materials are his sources. The more precise
his delimitation of persons, area, time, and
function, the more relevant his sources are
likely to be (Gottschalk, 1969).
It is from historical sources that our
history is studied and written. But in
analyzing them, several methodologies and
theories were used by historians to properly
study history and glean from the sources
what is, for them, a proper way of writing
history to enhance and disseminate national
identify.
Primary versus Secondary Sources 1.
Primary sources are the raw materials of
historical research - they are the documents
or artifacts closest to the topic of
investigation.
The following are examples of primary
sources:
1. Autobiographies and memoirs
2. Diaries, personal letters, and correspondence
3. Interviews, surveys, and fieldwork 4.
Internet communications on email, blogs,
listservs, and newsgroups
5. Photograph, drawing
6. Works of arts and
literature
7. Speeches and oral histories
8. Original documents (birth certificates,
property deeds, trial transcripts)
9. Research data, such as census
10. Official and unofficial records of
organizations and government agencies
11. Artifacts of all kinds, such as tools,
coins, clothing, furniture, etc.
12. Government documents (reports, bills,
proclamations, hearings, etc.) 13. Patents
2. Secondary sources offer an analysis or a
restatement of primary sources. They often
attempt to describe or explain primary
sources.
The following are examples of
secondary sources:
1. Bibliographies
2. Biographical works
3. Reference books, including
dictionaries, encyclopedias, and
atlases
4. Articles from magazines, journals, and
newspapers after the event
5. Literature reviews and review articles
(e.g., movie reviews, book reviews) 6.
History books and other popular or
scholarly books
7. Works of criticism and interpretation
8. Commentaries and treatises
Most scholars use the following
questions in evaluating the validity and
credibility of sources of historical accounts. 1.
How did the author know about the given
details? Was author present at the event? How
soon was the author able to gather the details
of the events?
2. Where did the information come from?
Is it a personal experience, an
statistics eyewitness account, or a report made
by another person’s?

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 7

Hearsay and Secondary Evidence
When historian can find no primary
3. Did the author conclude based on a single witness, he uses the best secondary witness
source, or o many sources of evidence? available. Unlike the lawyer, he wishes to discover
a nearly as possible what happened rather than
If the evaluation of an available source
who was at fault. If he sometimes has to make
shows any indication that it is an interpretative
judgments, he does not have to pass sentence and
work rather than a factual firsthand account, it is
hence he does not have the same hesitation as a
considered as a secondary source. Thus, in
judge to permit evidence that practice rules out of
conducting historical researcher, it is important to
courtrooms.
identify first whether the available sources are
In cases where he uses secondary
primary or secondary sources. This is to determine
witnesses, however, he does not rely upon them
how reliable and helpful these sources are.
fully. On the contrary, he asks: (1) On whose
primary testimony does the secondary witness base
his statements? (2) Did the secondary witness
accurately report the primary testimony as a whole?
(3) if not, in what details did he accurately report
the primary testimony? Satisfactory answers to the
second and third questions may prove the historian
with the whole or the substance of the primary
testimony upon which the secondary witness may
be his only means of knowledge. In such cases the
secondary source is the historian’s “original”
source, in the sense of being the “origin” of his
knowledge. In so far as this “original” source is an
accurate report of primary testimony, he tests its
credibility as he would that of the primary
testimony itself.
Thus, hearsay evidence would not be
discarded by the historian as it would be by a law
court, merely because it is hearsay. It is
unacceptable only in so far as it cannot be
established as accurate reporting of primary
testimony. A single example will perhaps suffice
to make that clear. A White House correspondent
stating what the president had said at a press
conference would be a primary source of
information on the president’s words. The same
correspondent telling a presidential secretary’s
version of what the president had said would be a
Non – written Sources of History
secondary or hearsay witness, and probably
would be successfully challenged
in a courtroom and yet if the
correspondent were a
skilled and honorable reporter and if the
presidential secretary were competent and
honest, the correspondent s account might by
a thoroughly accurate statement of what the
president in fact had said. Even the most
punctilious historian might retain that kind of
evidence for further corroboration.
Categories of Written Sources
Activity 1: Identifying Primary and Secondary Sources
Name:_________________________________________ Score:_______________________
Directions: Determine whether the following are primary or secondary sources. Circle
the letter indicating whether the item is a "P" primary source or "S" secondary source.
For each one, explain your reasoning in complete sentence.
1. The story of your grandfather tells you about his experience during the World War
1. Narrative - Chronicles or tracts presented
in narrative form, written to impart a
message whose motives for their
composition vary widely.
o A newspaper article might be intended
to shaped opinion; to so-called ego
document or personal narrative such
as diary or memoir.
2. Diplomatic sources - Those which
document/record an existing legal situation
or create a new one, and it is these kinds of
sources that professional historians treated
as the “best” source.
o A legal document is usually sealed or
authenticated to provide evidence that
a legal transaction has been completed
and can be used as evidence in a
judicial proceeding in case of dispute
3. Social Document - Information pertaining
for economic, social, political, or judicial
significance.
o They are records kept by bureaucracies.
o Example. Government reports, such as
municipal accounts, research findings,
and documents like civil registry
records, property register, and records
of census.
1. Material evidence
“archeological evidence
o One of the most important unwritten
evidences.
o Artistic creations such as pottery,
jewelry, dwellings, graves, churches,
roads, and other that tell a story
about the past
2. Oral evidence
o Source of information for historians,
told by the tales or sagas of ancient
people. Folksongs or popular rituals
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 8
 II. P S
Why:

______
2. A letter written by Alberto Dela Cruz to his mother about the latest developments in
the Revolutionary War. P S
Why:

3. The Diary of Anne Frank - the published diary of a teenage girl who experiences the
Holocaust first hand . P S
Why:

4. Your Sociology textbook or an encyclopedia. P S

Why:

______
5. Your high school diplomas. P S
Why:

______

6. A photograph of you and your friends at your 8th birthday party. P S

Why:

______

7. The information from the museum tour guide who shows you around the exhibit and
shares facts with you. P S
Why: _____________________________________________________________________

8. A mummy from Cordillera. P S

Why:

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 9

9. Give at least 5 more examples of a primary source.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
10. Give at least 5 more examples of a secondary source.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
11. list down five (5) example of sources which can either be primary or secondary
depending on the context ad use.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Activity 2: Sources of Historical Data

Name: ______________________________ Score: ___________ Course & Year:

____________________ Date: ____________

Instructions: Give a concise explanation/discussion on the following items. 1. What

is the main distinction between primary and secondary?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________.
2. Why is primary source important in the study of history?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

9
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 0

3. What is the purpose of a secondary sources?

_______________________________________________________________
_________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
___________
4. Appreciating history. Try to remember the last national holiday that we have. Why
do you think that the common perception of a holiday is “no classes” to the point
that it has become its meaning? What were lost, that we have come to view
national holidays like this? Why were they lost?

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

10

Historical Criticism
Lesson 3: Historical Criticisms
difficult problem only on rare occasions,
when the writer or witnesses to the writing
Examines the origins of the earliest
text to appreciate the underlying
circumstances upon which the text came to
be (Soulen &Soulen, 2001). It has two
important goals: 1) to discover the original
meaning of the text in its primitive or
historical context and its literal sense or
sensus literalis historicus. 2) to establish a
reconstruction of the historical situation of
the author and recipients of the text.
Historical criticism has two types: external
criticism and internal criticism.
There are two parts of historical
criticism, the first part is to determine the
authenticity of the material, also called
provenance of a source. The critic should
determine the origin of the material, its
author, and the source of information used.
External criticism is used in determining
these facts. The second part is to weigh the
testimony to the truth. The critic must
examine the trustworthiness of
testimonies as well as determine
probability of the statements to be true. This
process is called internal criticism or higher
criticism since it deals with more important
matters than the external form.
Problem of Authenticity or
External Criticism1
The problem of authenticity seldom
concerns the sociologist or psychologist or
an anthropologist, who generally has a
living subject under his eye, can see him as
he prepares his autobiography, and can
cross-examine him about doubtful points.
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 1
Even in the law courts the question of
authenticity of documents becomes a
1
Lifted from his book Understanding History: a primer
of historical method, New York: Alfred A. Knopf pp.
118-138. (Source notes and footnotes were
intentionally deleted from this reading.)
cannot be produced. But for historical
documents these occasions are not rare.
They are in fact frequent for manuscript
sources; and if doubt as to authenticity arises
less often from printed sources, it is because
usually some skilled editor has already
performed the task of authenticating them.
Test of Authenticity
To distinguish a hoax or a
misrepresentation from a genuine document,
the historian has to use tests that are
common also in police and legal detection.
Making the best guess he can of the date of
the document, he examines the materials to
see whether they are not anachronistic:
paper was rare in Europe
before the Fifteenth century, and printing
was unknown; pencils did not exist there
before the sixteenth century; typewriting
was not invented until nineteenth century;
and India paper came only at the end of that
century. The historian also examines the ink
for signs of age or for anachronistic chemical
composition.
Making his best guess of the possible
the
author of the document, he sees if he can
the identify the handwriting, signature, seal,
letterhead, or watermark.
Even when the handwriting is
unfamiliar, it can be compared with
authenticated specimens. One of the
unfulfilled needs of the historian is more of
what the French call “isographies” –
dictionaries of biography giving examples of
handwriting. For some periods of history,
experts using techniques known as
paleography and diplomatic, first
systematized by Mabillon in the seventeenth
century, have long known that in certain
regions at certain times handwriting and the
style and form of official documents were

more or less conventionalized. Seals have
been the subject of special study by
sigillographers, and experts can detect faked
ones. Anachronistic style (idiom, orthography,
or punctuation) can be detected by
specialists who are familiar with
contemporary writing. Often spelling,
particularly of proper names and signatures
(because too good or too bad or
anachronistic), reveals a forgery as would
also unhistoric grammar.
Anachronistic references to events
(too early or too late or too remote) or the
dating of a document at a time when the
alleged writer could not possibly have been
at the placed designated (the alibi) uncovers
fraud. Sometimes the skillful forger has all
too carefully followed the best historical
sources and his product becomes too
obviously a copy in certain passages; or
where, by skillful paraphrase and invention,
he/she is given away by the absence of trivia
and otherwise unknown details from his/her
manufactured account. Usually, however, if
the document is where it ought to be – for
example in a family’s archives, or among a
business firm’s or lawyer’s papers, or in a
governmental bureau’s record (but not
merely because it is in a library or in an
amateur’s autograph collection) – its
provenance (or its custody, as the lawyers call
it), creates a presumption of its genuineness
(Gottschalk, 1969).
Identification of Author and of Date Some
guess of the approximate date of the
document and some identification of its
supposed author (or, at least, a surmise as to
his location in time and space as this habit,
attitudes, character, learning, associates, etc.)
obviously form an essential part of external
criticism. Otherwise, it would be impossible
to prove or disprove authenticity by
anachronisms, handwriting, style, alibi, or
other tests that are associated with the
author’s milieu, personality, and actions. But
similar knowledge or guesses are also
11
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 2
necessary for internal criticism.
Having established an
authentic text and discovered
what its author really intended to say, the
historian has only established what they
wetness’s testimony is. He has yet to
determine whether that testimony is at all
credible, and if so, to what extent. That is the
problem of internal criticism.
The Problem of Credibility or Internal
Criticism
The historian first aims in the
examination of testimony to obtain a set of
particulars relevant to some topic or
question that he has in mind. Isolated
particulars have little meaning by
themselves, and unless they have a context
or fit into a hypothesis they are of doubtful
value. But that is a problem of synthesis,
which will be discussed later. What we are
now concerned with is the analysis of
documents of credible details to be fitted
into a hypothesis or context.
The historian, however, is prosecutor,
attorney for the defense, judge and jury all
in one. But as judge he rules out not
evidence whatever if it is relevant. To him
any single detail of testimony is credible –
even if it is contained in a document
obtained by force or fraud, or is otherwise
impeachable, based on hearsay evidence, or
from an interested witness – provided it can
pass four tests:
1. Was the ultimate source of the detail
(the primary witness) able to tell the
truth?
2. Was the primary witness will to tell
the truth?
3. Is the primary witness accurately
reported with regard to the detail
under examination?
4. Is there any independent
corroboration of the detail under
examination?

1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
Garraghan (1950) identified six points
of inquiries to evaluate the authenticity of a
primary sources:
1. Date – when was it produced? 2.
Localization – where did it originate?
3. Authorship – who wrote it?
4. Analysis – what pre-existing
material served as the basis for its
production?
5. Integrity – what was its original
form
6. Credibility – what is the evidential
value of its content?
The absence of primary sources
documents that can be attest to the accuracy
of any historical claims, the secondary
sources should not be discredited. As
Gottschalk (1969), emphasized that it is
impossible for historians to avoid using
secondary sources due to difficulty in
accessing primary sources. Most often,
historians depend on secondary sources to
improve their background knowledge of
contemporary documents and detect any
errors they may contain. Specifically,
Gottschalk suggested that secondary sources
must only be used for 1) deriving the setting
wherein the contemporary evidence will fit in the
grand narrative of history; 2) getting leads to other
12
3
bibliographic data; 3) acquiring quotations or
citations from contemporary or other sources; 4)
deriving interpretations with a view of testing and
improving them but not accepting them as outright
truth. Historian should be prepared to verify the
information provided by secondary sources.
Martha Howell and Walter Prevenier
(2001) stated that before any source can be
considered as evidence in a historical argument, it
must satisfy three preconditions.
1. It must be comprehensible at the most basic
level of vocabulary, language, and
handwriting. It sets the ground for the
contentions on the acceptability of the
source and all the aspects of the debate.
2. The source must be carefully located in
accordance with place and time. Its author,
composer, or writer, and the location where
it was produced/published should be noted
for the checking of authenticity and
accuracy. One example is a personal letter
which usually indicates when (date) ad
where (Place) it was written. This
information can assist in corroborating the
details of the source given the whereabouts
of its author as stated in a letter.
3. Through the first two preconditions, the
authenticity of the source must always be
checked and counterchecked before being
accepted as a credible source in any
historical findings. Subtle details such as the
quality of paper used, the ink or the
watermark of the parchment used, the way
 it was encoded using a typeface or the way
the tape was electronically coded
should be carefully scrutinized to
check if it was forged or mislabeled
by archivists.
Historians not only evaluate the
sources in terms of external characteristics
that focus on the questions of where, when,
and by whom. They also evaluate in terms of
internal criteria which include seven factors

13
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 4
5. The authorship authority of the document
identified by Howell and Prevenier (2001) as – refers to the relationship
cited by Asuncion and Cruz (2019): between the document’s
subject matter and its
1. The genealogy of the document – refers to author;
the development of the document. The 6. The competence of the observer – refers to
document may be original, a copy, or a the author’s capabilities and
copy of the copy; qualifications to critically comprehend
2. The genesis of the document – includes and report
the situations and the authorities during information; and
the document’s productions; 7. The trustworthiness of the observer –
3. The originality of the document – includes refers to the author’s integrity – whether he
the nature of the document whether it is or she fabricates or reports truthfully.
an eye/earwitness account or merely
passing of In general, the reliability of
existing information; primary sources is assessed on how
4. The interpretation of the document – these sources are directly related and
pertains to deducing meaning from the closely connected to the time of the
documents; events they pertain to.

Assessment #3
Analyzing Primary Sources

Instructions: Read the full transcript of the undelivered Arrival Speech of Senator
Benigno S. Aquino, Jr. and answer the following questions below.
 The undelivered speech of Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr. upon his return from the U.S., August 21,
1983 retrieved from https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1983/08/21/the-undelivered-speech-of-senator-benigno-s-
aquino jr-upon-his-return-from-the-u-s-august-21-1983/

I have returned on my free will to join the ranks of those struggling to restore our rights and freedoms
through nonviolence.

I seek no confrontation. I only pray and will strive for a genuine national reconciliation founded on justice.

I am prepared for the worst, and have decided against the advice of my mother, my spiritual adviser, many
of my tested friends and a few of my most valued political mentors.

A death sentence awaits me. Two more subversion charges, both calling for death penalties, have been
filed since I left three years ago and are now pending with the courts.

I could have opted to seek political asylum in America, but I feel it is my duty, as it is the duty of every
Filipino, to suffer with his people especially in time of crisis.

I never sought nor have I been given assurances or promise of leniency by the regime. I return voluntarily
armed only with a clear conscience and fortified in the faith that in the end justice will emerge triumphant.

According to Gandhi, the willing sacrifice of the innocent is the most powerful answer to insolent tyranny
that has yet been conceived by God and man.

Three years ago, when I left for an emergency heart bypass operation, I hoped and prayed that the rights
and freedoms of our people would soon be restored, that living conditions would improve and that blood
letting would stop.

Rather than move forward, we have moved backward. The killings have increased, the economy has taken a

14
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 5
turn for the worse and the human rights situation has deteriorated.

During the martial law period, the Supreme Court heard petitions for Habeas Corpus. It is most ironic,
after martial law has allegedly been lifted, that the Supreme Court last April ruled it can no longer
entertain petitions for Habeas Corpus for persons detained under a Presidential Commitment Order,
which covers all so-called national security cases and which under present circumstances can cover
almost anything.

The country is far advanced in her times of trouble. Economic, social and political problems bedevil the
Filipino. These problems may be surmounted if we are united. But we can be united only if all the rights
and freedoms enjoyed before September 21, 1972 are fully restored.

The Filipino asks for nothing more, but will surely accept nothing less, than all the rights and freedoms
guaranteed by the 1935 Constitution—the most sacred legacies from the Founding Fathers.

Yes, the Filipino is patient, but there is a limit to his patience. Must we wait until that patience snaps?

The nation-wide rebellion is escalating and threatens to explode into a bloody revolution. There is a
growing cadre of young Filipinos who have finally come to realize that freedom is never granted, it is
taken. Must we relive the agonies and the blood-letting of the past that brought forth our Republic or can
we sit down as brothers and sisters and discuss our differences with reason and goodwill?

I have often wondered how many disputes could have been settled easily had the disputants only dared to
define their terms.

So as to leave no room for misunderstanding, I shall define my terms:

1. Six years ago, I was sentenced to die before a firing squad by a Military Tribunal whose jurisdiction I
steadfastly refused to recognize. It is now time for the regime to decide. Order my IMMEDIATE
EXECUTION OR SET ME FREE.

I was sentenced to die for allegedly being the leading communist leader. I am not a communist, never was
and never will be.

2. National reconciliation and unity can be achieved but only with justice, including justice for our Muslim
and Ifugao brothers. There can be no deal with a Dictator. No compromise with Dictatorship.

3. In a revolution there can really be no victors, only victims. We do not have to destroy in order to build.

4. Subversion stems from economic, social and political causes and will not be solved by purely military
solutions; it can be curbed not with ever increasing repression but with a more equitable distribution of
wealth, more democracy and more freedom, and

5. For the economy to get going once again, the workingman must be given his just and rightful share of
his labor, and to the owners and managers must be restored the hope where there is so much uncertainty
if not despair.

On one of the long corridors of Harvard University are carved in granite the words of Archibald Macleish:

“How shall freedom be defended? By arms when it is attacked by arms; by truth when it is attacked by lies;
by democratic faith when it is attacked by authoritarian dogma. Always, and in the final act, by
determination and faith.”

I return from exile and to an uncertain future with only determination and faith to offer—faith in our
people and faith in God.

15
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 6

Assessment #3
Analyzing Primary Sources

Name: _______________________________________________ Score: ___________ Course

& Year: _____________________________________ Date: ___________
I. First Impressions
1. What are your first impressions about the undelivered speech?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
.
2. What kind of document is it?________________________________________

II. Looking More Closely

A. Make a list of unusual or unfamiliar words or phrases you encountered while
reading the speech.

1. 6. 11.
2. 7. 12.
3. 8. 13.
4. 9. 14.
5. 10. 15.

B. Is there a specific date on the speech? If so, when is it? If there is none, are there clues
that might indicate when it was written?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
C. Is there an indicated location? Where is it? _______________________________
D. Who authored the document? Why did you say so?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
E. To whom was the written document addressed? How did you know?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

16
1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 7

F. What is the purpose of the document? What made you think so?
_______________________________________________________________
 ___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
____________
III. Thinking Further
A. What do you think is the most important information that the author of the document
was conveying? Why?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
B. What is the point of view of the author? Is it objective? Why?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

IV. Drawing Conclusions

Integrate your background knowledge of the context of the speech with the
content of the speech. What conclusions can you draw about the historical period when
the speech was written?
________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Activity adopted from Asuncion and Cruz (2019), RPH

17
 1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 8

Analyzing Primary vs Secondary Sources

The “Acta de Tejeros”

Historical Context of the Documents

Since its founding on July 7, 1892, the Katipunan (Kataas-taasang Kagalang-galangang
Katipunan nang manga Anak nang Bayan) or KKK remained to be an underground organization and
had remained a secret organization until its discovery on August 19, 1896, at a time when Spanish
officials and friars were already hearing rumors and were suspicious about the existence of a
rebellious group. The discovery, which was simply an accident for it happened only because of the
petty quarrel between Apolonio dela Cruz and Teodoro Patiño who worked at the printing press of
Diario de Manila and also members of the Katipunan. The bickering resulted in Patiño confiding to his
sister who lived in an orphanage in Mandaluyong and whose grief made her mother superior to
convince Patiño to confide about the secret organization to Fr. Mariano Gil. The friar-curate was
already suspicious about the existence of the rebel group Patiño’s sister was not actually worried
about her brother’s quarrel but about his participation and membership in an underground
rebellious organization. His brother was then convinced to divulge the secret organization to the
suspicious Fr. Gil who brought with him Spanish guards to raid the printing press and found
evidences of the Katipunan in their lockers (Agoncillo and Guerrero, 1977, p. 195).
The succeeding pages will present the two documents delineating the Katipunan and the
Revolution based on primary and secondary source. Read the two documents, and evaluate the
sources using external and internal criticism.

About the Authors

Santiago Alvarez (a.k.a. Gen. Apoy or Kidlat ng Apoy) was born on July 25,
1872 at Noveleta, Cavite. He was the only child of Gen. Mariano Alvarez (a.k.a.
Gen. Maninam) leader of the Magdiwang faction and Nicolasa Virata. His
parents’ ambition for him was to become a teacher thus he studied under the
tutelage of Antonio Dacon at Imus, later under Ignacio Villocillo, and then
transferred to Tondo under Macario Hernandez. He was 24 years old when his
education was interrupted at the outbreak of the revolution. He led the
revolutionaries in the Battle of Dalahican. He continued his education after
the revolution where he entered UST, transferred to San Juan de Letran to
finish his Bachelor in Arts degree and eventually earned his law degree at
Liceo de Manila (Alvarez, 1977, p. 2). He was already having his law practice in
the 1920s when a new air of vibrance was blowing in the hope that the
Americans would grant the Philippines its independence come 1921. The hope
was drawn from the promise of the Jones Law of 1916 which stated in the
preamble that the US will grant independence upon proof of the Philippine’s capability to govern itself. The eager
anticipation would usher in a new era that would place the heroic acts of the Revolution of 1896 and the living
veterans of the revolution in oblivion. In the preface of his book, Memoirs of a General, he implied his aim, to make
known to the youth the fading struggle of the revolutionaries and the story of the revolution. Working from his
notes, he reconstructed the story of the revolution as a participant-eyewitness. His work was first serialized in
Tagalog weekly magazine Sampaguita in 36 parts beginning July 1927. In June 1973, Carolina Malay translated the
original Tagalog version into English which was completed sometime in 1977.

Revolt of the Masses by Teodoro Agoncillo

Born in Lemery, Batangas in 1934
He obtained his AB Philosophy and Master’s degree at UP.
He worked as linguistic assistant at the Institute of National
Language
He taught at FEU and MLQU.
After the publication of his seminal works, Revolt of the Masses, the
Crisis of the Malolos Republic, he was invited to teach at the
Department of History at UP where he later became chairman.
He died on January 14, 1985.
He became a national scientist, posthumously.

18
 1
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 9 Reading 1: Primary Source
The Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General
Extract from The Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General by Santiago Alvarez, Trans. By
Paula Carolina S. Malay with introductions by Dr. Ruby Paredes, pp. 3-4,82-89, Copyright © 1992 by
Ateneo University Press and the Center for Southeast Asian Studies.

Preface
As the country moves toward change, the youth become more discerning and discriminating regarding
the competence of authors, especially those of historical writings. They begin to question the credentials of
anyone who dares to write a history of the people or even of mere episodes. They look for motivations for
such writings and inquire about their sources.
Before we look into the period of Philippine history concerning the Katipunan and the Revolution that I
discuss in the following pages, I wish to say a few things about my humble self. I shall be fifty-five years old
on 25 July 1927; I was born in the year 1872 in Noveleta, Cavite. In my early years, I studied under Macario
Her nandez at his school located on Camba Street in Manila. Subsequently, I attended San Juan de Letran
College and the University of Santo Tomas. After the tumultuous cry for national freedom (the Revolution),
I resumed my studies in 1902, at the law school of the Liceo de Manila, and later worked at the law offices
of Felipe Buencamino, Sr., and of R. del Rosario. While working in the latter’s law office, I earned my law
degree.
For five full years, from August 1896 to August 1901, I was one of those who guided the Revolution. But
even before the outbreak of the Revolution, I was already active in the Katipunan as a member and as a
delegate; as such, I was often in the company of the Supremo Andres Bonifacio, Dr. Pio Valenzuela, and Mr.
Emilio Jacinto. We organized chapters and propagated the movement in general. In the process, I was able
to keep some notes about our experiences. As these were written in pencil on ordinary paper, they are
now faded with age and have become difficult to read, especially by people other than myself. The
following narrative, therefore, is not only of an eyewitness but also of active participant.
I am greatly indebted to my colleague and friend, Mr. Lope K. Santos, whose nationalist sentiments
encouraged me to undertake this project. He prodded me into writing these memoirs by arguing that since I
could shed more light on the different facets of the Revolution, I would be doing a service to the youth,
whom he saw as the direct beneficiaries of this work. I myself would prefer that I reconstruct those events
from my notes now instead of somebody else doing it after my death. My notes would appear disjointed
and unclear to anyone else aside from myself, and any attempt to utilize them to write a historical account
of the period would prove of little value.
The events I have related in this account of the Katipunan and the Revolution reverberate with shouts of
“Long live our patriots!” and “Death to the enemy!” These were in answer to the enemy’s assaults with
mausers and cannon, the latter fired from both land and sea.
The Magdiwang government honored me with an appointment as captain general, or head of its army.
Gen. Artemio Ricarte was lieutenant general.
I will now attempt to write down what I saw and what I know about the Katipunan and the Revolution.
First I shall narrate the events relating to the revolution beginning from 14 March 1896; then I shall deal with
the organization and activities of the Society of the Sons of the People (full name: Kamahalmahalan at
Kataastaasang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan [The Most Venerable Supreme Society of the Sons of the
People]). The Katipunan account is based on records which were entrusted to me by the original founders
of the Katipunan.
In the interest of honorable truth, I shall now attempt to write a history of the Katipunan and the
Revolution which I hope will be acceptable to all. However, I realize that it is inevitable that, in the narration
of actual happenings, I shall run the risk of hurting the feelings of contemporaries and comrades-in-arms. I
would like to make it clear that I shall try to be as objective as possible and that it is far from my intention to
depreciate anyone’s patriotism and greatness.
I shall be honored if these memoirs become a worthy addition to what Gen. Artemio Ricarte has already
published in this weekly… (Alvarez)
The Revolution was facing a grave crisis. The Katipunan forces in Cavite were suffering defeat after
defeat with great loss of life. Magdalo territories had passed to Spanish hands after the Battles of Salitran,
Zapote, and Dalahikan. Imus, the rebel capital was in a state of imminent collapse. To strengthen defenses
so that they could stop the Spanish advance into the rest of the province that was still held by the
Magdiwang and to forestall the loss of more lives, the Supremo Bonifacio, with the approval of other
revolutionary leaders, called a meeting of the Magdalo and Magdiwang leaders. This meeting, scheduled
for 24 March 1897,

19
 2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 0

was postponed for the next day because of the death of Lt. Gen. Crispulo Aguinaldo, Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo’s
brother, on that day in the Battle of Salitran.
The Magdiwang leaders were waiting for their Magdalo counterparts at the Tejeros friar estate house,
the designated place, long after lunch on that day. They had designated place, long after lunch on that day.
They had to start in the afternoon to allow the usual enemy raids, which came in the morning, to subside
before they ventured out to Tejeros, a village in the municipality of San Francisco de Malabon. When the
Magdalo group finally came at about five in the afternoon, they brought with the sad news of the death of
General Magdalo’s own brother. Heading a small group, General Magdalo recounted the circumstances of the
heroic death of his patriot brother. Then he begged to be excused to attend to arrangements for his beloved
brother’s funeral. Thus, the meeting was put off for the next day at the same place.
But before dispersing, Secretary of the Treasury Diego Mojica proposed a resolution of condolence and
prayers for patriots who had died heroically like Lt. Gen. Crispulo Aguinaldo. The Supremo Bonifacio thought
this was superfluous and objected to such a resolution. “True love of country,” the Supremo argued, “and
service to the cause of freedom for the Motherland are the noblest attributes that would ensure one’s place
in heaven. Lt. Gen. Crispulo Aguinaldo and the comrades who died before him are all truly blessed and are
now in their respective places in the heavenly kingdom. Moreover, they will always occupy an honored place
in the history of our country.”
The assembly at Tejeros was finally convened on 25 March 1897. The invitations to the meeting were
signed by Secretary Jacinto Lumbreras of the Magdiwang Council, and he presided over the assembly. Seated
with Lumbreras at the long presidential table were the Supremo Andres Bonifacio, Messrs. Mariano Alvarez,
Pascual Alvarez, Ariston Villanueva, Mariano C. Trias, Diego Mojica, Emiliano R. de Dios, Santiago V. Alvarez,
Artemio Ricarte, Santos Nocon, Luciano San Miguel, Pablo Mojica, Severino de las Alas, and Santiago Rillo, all
of them of the Magdiwang. Among the Magdalo seated at the head table were Messrs. Baldomero Aguinaldo,
Daniel Tirona, and Cayetano Topacio.
It must be mentioned that, before the assembly was convened, Secretary of War Ariston Villanueva of the
Magdawang Council received the confidential information that Mr. Daniel Tirona of the Magdalo faction was
set to undermine the proceedings of the assembly and that he had already succeeded in enjoining many
among the Magdiwang leaders to ally with him. Secretary Villanueva kept silent, but nevertheless alerted
Captain General Apoy, who had troops in readiness for any sudden eventuality.
The leaders were seated at the presidential table, as previously described, and all the others were
standing in groups on both sides of those seated. After Chairman Jacinto Lumbreras had declared the
assembly open, he announced the main topic of discussion, which was how to bolster the defenses in the
areas still under Magdiwang control. Presently, Mr. Severino de las Alas rose to speak, and when he was
recognized he said, “Before we discuss minor details, let us first tackle the major issue such as what kind of
government we should have and how we should go about establishing it. Once we make a decision about
these questions, the problem of organization and strengthening of defenses will be resolved.”
“As initiator of the Revolution,” Chairman Lumbreras replied, “the Katipunan now holds authority over
the islands. It has a government of law and a definite program. It is obeyed and respected by all because it
stands for freedom, brotherly love, and a well-organized and well-run government. The purpose of this
meeting is to discuss the best measures to take to strengthen the Magdiwang government vis-à-vis the
enemy. We should avoid surrendering the headquarters of the Katipunan army should the Magdalo
eventually lose out.”
The chair next recognized the Supremo. He concurred with what Chairman Lumbreras had just said and
explained that the “K” in the middle of the sun in the Katipunan flag used in the Revolution stood for
Kalayaan (freedom).
Mr. Severino de las Alas spoke again. He countered that the letter “K” and the sun on the flag did not
indicate whether the revolutionary government was democratic or not.
The Supremo replied that from the rank and file to the highest levels, the Katipunan was united in its respect
for universal brotherhood and equality of men. It was risking bloodshed and life itself in its struggle against
the king, in order to establish a sovereign and free government. In short, it stood for people’s sovereignty,
not a government led by only one or two.
Mr. Antonio Montenegro spoke in defense of Mr. Severino de las Alas’s stand. He argued that if they
would not agree on the kind of revolutionary government they were to have and that if they were to let the
status quo prevail, then they who were in the Revolution would be no better than a pack of bandits or of wild,
mindless animals.
General Apoy was hurt by these words of Mr. Montenegro. He quickly stood up and looked angrily at the
previous speaker.
“We of the Katipunan,” he began, “are under the jurisdiction of our respected Highest Council of the
sons of the People. This Council is the defender of, and has authority over, the Magdiwang and Magdalo

20
 2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 1

governments of Cavite. We are true revolutionaries fighting for freedom of the native land. We are not
bandits who rob others of their property and wealth. Nor should we be likened to beasts, for we know how
to protect and defend others, especially the political refugees who seek asylum with us. We are rational and
we do not expose those who talk big but do not accomplish anything. If you want to establish a different kind
of government that is to your liking, you must do as we have done. Go back to your localities and snatch them
from Spanish control! Then you can do what pleases you; but don’t you dare seek refuge among cowards
who might call you bandits and beasts. And for everybody’s satisfaction, I am now ordering you arrested!”
Captain General Apoy stopped speaking and looked intently at the person he was alluding to and ordered
a detachment under Maj. Damaso Fojas to keep him under guard. After a short while, Dr. Jose Rizal’s sister,
Trining, and his widow, Josephine, pleaded with General Apoy not to arrest Mr. Montenegro, but to let him
stay at the estate house where they themselves were staying. They volunteered to be held personally
responsible for Mr. Montenegro while in their custody. Captain General Apoy easily acceded to the request.
The strong and excited denunciation by Captain General Apoy of Mr. Montenegro alerted the Magdiwang
troops. The leaders eyed everyone suspiciously and were only awaiting a signal from General Apoy for them
to begin shooting. Disorder ensued and disrupted the assembly.
When order was restored, some wanted the convention adjourned, but the Supremo Bonifacio prevailed
upon the others to continue. However, the presiding officer, Mr. Lumbreras, refused to resume his role of
chairman. He wanted to yield the chair to the Supremo whom he thought to be the rightful chairman.
The Katipunan, as you know,” Mr. Lumbreras explained, “was responsible from the beginning for the
spread of the revolutionary movement throughout the Philippines. But because of the disaffection of some,
this assembly was called to establish a new overall revolutionary council. If we are to pursue this ambitious
and important undertaking, only the Supremo has the right to preside at this assembly, for he is the Father of
the Katipunan and the Revolution.”
Mr. Lumbreras’s speech was well received and his proposal was unanimously accepted. The Supremo
Bonifacio assumed the chairmanship accordingly and said, “Your aim is to establish a new overall government
of the Katipunan of the Sons of the People. This would repudiate the decisions made at the meeting held at
the friar estate house in Imus. In my capacity as President-Supremo” of the Most Venerable Katipunan of the
Sons of the People, I agree and we should respect all decisions properly discussed and approved in all our
meetings. We should respect and abide by the wishes of the majority.”
Because of a repeated clamor for the approval of the establishment of a government of the Philippine
Republic, the chair proceeded to prepare for an election to the following positions: president, minister of
finance, minister of welfare, minister of justice, and captain general.
The Supremo spoke again before the election began. He said that the candidate who would get the most
number of votes for each position should be the winner, no matter what his station in life or his educational
attainment. What should matter was that the candidate had never been a traitor to the cause of the
Motherland. Everyone agreed and there were shouts of approval such as, “That is how it should be – equality
for everyone! Nobody should be higher nor lower than the other. May love of country prevail!”
The Supremo Bonifacio appointed Gen. Artemio Ricarte as secretary. Then, with the help of Mr. Daniel
Tirona, he distributed pieces of paper to serve as ballots. When the ballots had been collected and the votes
were ready to be canvassed, Mr. Diego Mojica, the Magdiwang secretary of the treasury, warned the
Supremo that many ballots distributed were already filled out and that the voters had not done this
themselves. The Supremo ignored this remark. He proceeded with the business at hand as if nothing unusual
had happened.
When the votes for president were counted, Mr. Emilio Aguinaldo won over Mr. Andres Bonifacio, the
Supremo. The winner was acclaimed by applause and shouts of “Mabuhay!” (Long live!). Mr. Severino de las
Alas spoke again to say that since the Supremo Bonifacio had received the second highest number of votes
for the presidency, he should be proclaimed vice-president of the government of the Philippine Republic.
When nobody signified approval or disapproval of the proposal, the presiding officer, the Supremo Bonifacio
ruled that the election be continued. For vice-president, Mr. Mariano Trias won over Mr. Mariano Alvarez and
the Supremo Bonifacio. General Vibora was elected captain over General Apoy. General Vibora demurred,
saying that he had neither the ability nor the right to assume the new position. But General Apoy cut short his
objections by saying that he personally vouched for General Vibora’s competence and right to occupy the
position to which he was elected. General Apoy’s endorsement was greeted with shouts of “Long live the
newly elected captain general!”
Mr. Baldomero Aguinaldo wanted the elections to be finished before it got too dark. To facilitate the
counting of votes, he suggested that for all other positions to be voted upon, voters should stand on one side
of the hall if in favor and on the other side if against. The suggestion was adopted for the rest of the election.
For the position of secretary of war, Mr. Emiliano R. de Dios was elected overwhelmingly over Messrs.
Santiago V. Alvarez, Ariston Villanueva, and Daniel Tirona. After the voters had given the proper honors to the

21
 2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 2

new secretary of war, they proceeded to elect the secretary of the interior. Mr. Andres Bonifacio, the
Supremo, won over Mr. Mariano Alvarez. The crowd broke into shouts of “Mabuhay!” Mr. Daniel Tirona
requested for a restoration of order and then spoke aloud.
“My brethren, the office of secretary of the interior is of so great a scope and of such sensitivity that we
should not entrust it to one who is not a lawyer. One among us is a lawyer. He is Mr. Jose del Rosario. Let us
reconsider the choice for the last position, for, he has no credentials to show attesting to any educational
attainment.
Then in as loud a voice as he could muster, Tirona shouted, “Let us elect Mr. Jose del Rosario, the
lawyer!”
Greatly embarrassed, the Supremo Bonifacio quickly stood up and said, “We agreed to abide by the
majority vote and accept its choice no matter what the station in life of the person elected. And because of
this, I demand from you, Mr. Daniel Tirona, an apology. You must restore to the voters and the one they
elected the honor you have only now besmirched.”
Then he pulled out his revolver and took aim.
Instead of replying, Mr. Tirona ignored the Supremo’s remarks and, perhaps because of fear, he slid away
and got lost in the crowd. Disorder ensued as the convention secretary tried to disarm the Supremo, who was
intent on shooting Mr. Tirona. The people began to disperse and the Supremo adjourned the meeting with
these words:
“In my capacity as chairman of this convention and as President-Supremo of the Most Venerable
Katipunan of the Sons of the People which association is known and acknowledged by all, I hereby declare
null and void all matters approved in this meeting.”
Then he left quickly and was followed by his aides and some others present.
Mr. Baldomero Aguinaldo, the Magdalo president, did not leave San Francisco de Malabon that night, in
order to convince the Magdiwang leaders to reconvene the disrupted meeting the following day. They
agreed to his proposal. That same night rumor had it that Messrs. Mariano Trias, Daniel Tirona, Emiliano R. de
Dios, Santiago Rillo, and others were in the parish house of the Catholic church at Tanza (Santa Cruz de
Malabon), and that they were conferring with the priest, Fr. Cenon Villafranca. Many attested to seeing them,
but no one knew what they talked about.
On the request of Magdalo Pres. Baldomero Aguinaldo, a meeting was called at the same friar estate
house in Tejeros. Called on the day after the tumultuous convention, its purpose was to continue and
revalidate the proceedings of the election meeting, to revive their former alliances, and to restore cordiality
and fraternal love in their relations. Aside from the Supremo Andres Bonifacio, among the Magdiwang who
attended were Messrs. Mariano Alvarez, Diego Mojica, Ariston Villanueva, Pascual Alvarez, Jacinto Lumbreras,
Santiago Alvarez, Artemio Ricarte, Nicolas Portilla, Santos Nocon, and Fr. Manuel Trias, the parish priest of
San Francisco de Malabon. They waited until five that afternoon, but none of the Magdalo members came,
not even their president who had initiated what would have been a reconciliation meeting.
That same night it was rumored that the Magdalo leaders were currently holding their own meeting at
the parish house in Tanza. Though it had reason to be apprehensive because the Magdalo were meeting in
territory under its jurisdiction, the Magdiwang leadership looked the other way because the Magdalo were
hard-pressed for meeting places since its territories had all been taken by the Spanish enemy.
The next morning, 27 March 1897, eyewitnesses who had spied on the proceedings revealed that, indeed,
a meeting had taken place at the Tanza parish house and that the Supremo’s decisions regarding the election
at the friar estate house were not respected. These revelations surfaced despite denials from many sectors.
At the gathering in the “Tanza parish house, those elected at the Tejeros convention knelt before a
crucifix and in the name of the Holy Father, the highest pontiff of the Roman Catholic church, invoked the
martyred saints and solemnly took their office. F. Cenon Villafranca officiated. With Messrs. Severino de las
Alas and Daniel Tiona as witnesses, the following took their oaths of office: Messrs. Emilio Aguinaldo, Mariano
C. Trias, and Artemio Ricarte. Conspicuously absent was the Supremo Andres Bonifacio, who was not invited
although he was one of those elected to office. It will be recalled that as chairman of the Tejeros convention,
he declared null and void all matters approved by the assembly because of a grave violation of a principle
agreed upon before the election.
It should be noted here that, unknown to the Magdiwang Council, the Magdalo posted troops to guard
the Tanza parish house for their oath-taking ceremonies. The troops were under strict orders not to admit any
of unwanted Magdiwang partisans. If the news about the secret ceremony had leaked out earlier, and the
underdogs in the power struggle had attempted to break into it, they would have been annihilated then and
there.
The Spaniards captured and occupied the town of Imus in the afternoon of 25 March 1897. They left three
days afterwards and marched into the San Francisco de Malabon territory up to the village of Bakaw. When
they reached Bakaw, they were intercepted by Mardiwang troops led by Supremo Bonifacio and General

22
 2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 3
Apoy. A pitched battle ensued. But the Magdiwang initiative was foiled by the arrival of a great number of
enemy reinforcements at the height of the encounter. In the face of such an unfavorable situation, the
Supremo decided on a tactical retreat to their fortifications. General Apoy for his part, ordered Major
Baluyot to rally all other armed units of the Magdiwang army and assign them to the Tarike fortifications in
San Francisco de Malabon.
After the battle, the Spaniards encamped and rested in Bakaw, but throughout the night they were
harassed with potshots from small Katipunan bands.
Anticipating that the enemy encamped at Bakaw would try to penetrate the strong Dalahikan
fortifications in Noveleta from the rear, General Apoy ordered General San Miguel to pull out all troops from
Dalahikan and transfer them to some other fort.
On 3 April, the Supremo made a bid to recapture Noveleta. General Vibora and Gen. Santos Nocon
accompanied him in the offensive, which lasted the whole day. But despite a fierce determination on their
part and heavy enemy losses, they were unable to dislodge the Spaniards.
A few days after the Supremo’s unsuccessful attempt to retake Noveleta, fresh Spanish reinforcements
began arriving in great numbers in the open fields to the west of Bakaw and along the seashores of
Noveleta and Salinas. At nine that morn ing, artillery fire from mountain cannons began battering the San
Francisco de Malabon fortifications, extending from Tejeros to Tarike. A two-hour shelling was followed by
ground attack by cavalry and infantry troops.
After preliminary skirmishes, man-to-man combat broke out at the Tarike fort. It became a fierce
battleground as the rebels made a valiant defense. Every head that emerged from either side was quickly
bashed in or severed at the neck. All that could be heard was the rattle of gleaming blades, the burst of
gunfire, and the thud of bodies as they fell against the earth. Wielding a variety of arms such as spears,
machetes, daggers, revolvers, and rifles, the combatants locked in struggle and fell together. In one
instance, the tip of a bayonet piercing somebody’s middle came out straight through the back of another
who himself had a pointed machete sticking in his chest. In another instance, one who was mortally
wounded by a sharp dagger inflicted killed by the other’s gun. Another pair who fell together each had
bayonet thrusts, one through the navel and the other above the chest. Some had severed heads, others,
severed hands or feet.
General Apoy and the Supremo Bonifacio lost many gallant troops in this bloody and miserable battle.
Among those who died were the valiant Maj. Pio Baluyot and head soldiers Francisco Arnaldo, Juan Brosas,
Lucio Poblete, and Nicomedes Esguerra. The enemy rode roughshod over their bodies as they rushed into
town to raise their flag of victory and to burn houses.
Very early that morning before the battle, Captain General Apoy had visited the Tarike fort to boost the
morale of the Magdiwang and Balara troops. Then at past seven o’clock, they saw the Spaniards massing a
great number of their troops. The commanders of the Magdiwang and the Balara contingents thought it
was the better part of discretion if the captain general was not with them inside the fort when the
expected attack took place. Thus, Major Baluyot and Captain Olaes escorted him across the river to the
west of the town of San Francisco de Malabon.
Gen. Pio Del Pilar and his troops, along with a small detachment from Imus, came to help the defense of
San Francisco de Malabon, but for some unknown reason he withdrew even before the enemy could attack.
He made his withdrawal without notifying those inside the fort.
Coming from Imus and Kawit, the enemy took Noveleta without resistance. They captured the
fortifications and collected Katipunan arms and ammunition. Coming in and spreading out into the open
fields around Imus, Kawit, Noveleta, and San Francisco de Malabon, they overwhelmed the People’s troops
with their sheer number.

23
2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 4

Reading 2: Secondary Source

 24
2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 5
25
2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 6
 26
2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 7
 27
2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 8
 28
2
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 9
 29
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 0
 30
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 1
31
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 2

Assessment 4
Comparative Analysis: Primary vs Secondary
Sources

Name: ___________________________________ Ratings: _______________

Categories Primary Sources Secondary Source
Memoirs of a General by Revolt of the Masses by
Santiago Alvarez a.k.a Gen. Teodoro Agoncillo
Apoy

Author’s
Background

Objective of
the Author

Date written
or published

Mention of
dates

Key
Personalities

32
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 3
Thematic
motivation
of authors
(why the
Tejeros
meeting
failed?)

Sequencing
of events

33
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 4

Synthesis:
Compare primary and secondary sources of historical records using the two articles.
Which do you think provides a more accurate and detailed information on the story?
State and justify your claim. Use an extra sheet of paper if needed.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
A heroic act is an extraordinary feat done during extraordinary times that inspired others. What
qualities should we develop as Filipinos in order to get rid of animosities and rivalries descriptive of
the bad side of politics
____________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
References
Agoncillo, Teodoro and Guerero, Milagros (1977) History of the Filipino People. Quezon City: R.P. Garcia Publishing
Co.
Gottschalk, Louis (1969) Understanding History: a primer of historical method. New York: A.A. Knopf.

34
 3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 5

Module 2 Content and Contextual Analysis of Selected

Primary Sources in Philippine History

Overview

The complete Knowledge of the past through credible and reliable sources is essential to
the understanding and learning of you own history. History must be studies carefully; hence it
necessitates the application of historical method. Historical method is the process of critically
examining and analyzing the records and survivals of the past (Gottschalk, 1969).
The intent of the application of historical method is to make you competent in your
interpretation of facts and critical analysis of historical narrative or account. For this to be
achieved, you will be engaged in content and contextual analysis of the selected primary
sources.
Content analysis is a systematic evaluation of the primary source be it a text, or speech
that in the process you could develop and present an argument based on their own
understanding of the evidences from your readings. You will identify pertinent information
form the text/document and explain the its importance to your understanding of history in the
Philippine setting. Contextual analysis on the other hand, considers specially the time, place,
and situation when the primary source was written. The analysis as well includes the author’s
background, authority on the subject and intent perceptible, and its relevance and meaning to
people and society today.
In this module the following documents will be evaluated for content and contextual analysis:
1. Customs of the Tagalogs by Juan de Plasencia
2. Kartilla ng Katipunan
3. Act of Proclamation of Independence
4. Filipino Grievances against General Wood
5. President Corazon Aquino’s Speech before the U.S Congress 18 September 1986

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of this module, you are expected to:

1. identify the content, context, and perspective of the
documents
2. Explain the importance of the Selected Primary Sources to the
grand narrative of Philippine History
3. Evaluate the relevance of the documents to the present time.
4. Develop critical and analytical skills as you are exposed to
primary sources;
analyzed by also considering the author of
the document, his/her biographical
background, role in the event, and the intent
III. Discussion
for writing the document.
There are two other questions to
A Content Analysis considers the
consider when doing a context analysis: 1.
time and place the historical document was
How authoritative is the account/source?
written as well as the situation or the
2. How is it relevant today?
circumstances during the time (Torres, 2018).
Works pertaining to events in the past are
Historical Context of the Document

It was the voyage of Miguel Lopez
de Legaspi in 1565 that dropped the first
anchor towards directly colonizing the
islands of St. Lazarus as Magellan named
them in 1521 or the Western Islands (Islas del
Poniente) as the Spaniards in Europe called
them prior to renaming the islands during
the voyage of Ruy de Villalobos in 1542.
Between 1565 to 1571,
Augustinian priests on board
Legaspi’s voyage, Fray Diego de Herrera,
Fray Martin de Rada and Fray Pedro de
Gamboa worked for the conversion of the
natives to Christianity along the
communities where the fleet stopped. But
this was done in harsh despairing manner. If
Magellan affably made an encounter with
the Zubuanos during his visit in 1521, the
Spaniards’ return to Zubu through Legaspi
in 1565 was inhumanely done. Despite the
protest of the missionaries, Legaspi’s men
ravaged Zubu with artillery fire forcing the
survivors to flee to the grassy outskirts. In
the carnage they burned the idols but the
Spaniards found a white image believed to
have been the image of the infant Jesus
given to Juana the wife of Humabon. Upon
the return of the Zubuanos to the ravaged
site, they were Christianized and exacted
with tribute (Galande, 1977, pp. 884-885)
With the establishment of Manila as
capital of Islas Felipinas in 1571, missionary
work began to have its home. But the few
Augustinians could not do the job alone.
Before Legaspi died the next year, he sent a
letter to Madrid, asking for more
missionaries to the colony. Nineteen
Franciscans heeded the call in 1577 and
sailed from San Lucar de Barrameda
arriving in Manila the next year. In 1580,
Jesuits and Dominicans arrived in the
Philippines and in 1606 Augustinian
Recollects followed in the missionary work
(Cushner, 1977, pp. 1065-1066).
35
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 6
From Manila, missionaries dispersed
searching for people in barangays, but at the
same time learning their ways and language.
Learning the local language was more
efficient than teaching the natives Spanish
for the purpose of
Christianizing them. Thus,
several dictionaries in Ilocano, Bisaya,
Kapampangan, and Tagalog were produced
with the translation of Doctrina Christiana
in these languages. Thus, the glimpse of
how the untouched barangays looked like
was the product of these missionaries. These
are not writings of the inhabitants of the
barangays but the culture of the inhabitants
in the eyes of foreign missionaries. One of
this work was the writings of Fray Juan de
Plasencia.
Background of the Author
Fray Juan de Placencia’s real name
was Juan de Portacarero, one of the seven
children born in the region of Extremadura
during the Golden Age or Siglo de Oro of
Spain. This was the age of Spain’s venture to
other lands in search of riches. During this
time, there was an avid interest for
missionary work in the newly established
colonies and Plasencia signed up for
missionary work under the Franciscan order.
Plasencia was one of the first 19 Franciscan
missionaries who arrived in the Philippines
on July 2, 1578. He was assigned in the
Tagalog area and aside from sacerdotal and
missionary work, he was responsible for the
establishment of pueblos in Quezon, Laguna,
Rizal, and Bulacan. His keen ethnographic
skills made him produce his seminal work
Relacion de las Costumbres de los Tagalogs
(Customs of the Tagalogs) in 1589 and his
knack for language made him produce
Doctrina Christiana en Lengua Espanola Y
Tagala (Doctrina Christiana in Spanish and
Tagalog). He died in Liliw, Laguna in 1590.
His book was published in 1593
 36
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 7 37

3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 8

Customs of the Tagalogs

(TWO RELATIONS BY JUAN DE PLASENCIA, O.S.F.)

After receiving your Lordship's letter, I wished to reply immediately; but I postponed my answer in order
that I might first thoroughly inform myself in regard to your request, and to avoid discussing the
conflicting reports of the Indians, who are wont to tell what suits their purpose. Therefore, to this end, I
collected Indians from different districts—old men, and those of most capacity, all known to me; and
from them I have obtained the simple truth, after weeding out much foolishness, in regard to their
government, administration of justice, inheritances, slaves, and dowries.1 It is as follows:

CUSTOMS OF THE TAGALOGS

This people always had chiefs, called by them datos, who governed them and were captains in their
wars, and whom they obeyed and reverenced. The subject who committed any offense against them, or
spoke but a word to their wives and children, was severely punished.
These chiefs ruled over but few people: sometimes as many as a hundred houses, sometimes even
less than thirty. This tribal gathering is called in Tagalog a barangay. It was inferred that the reason for
giving themselves this name arose from the fact (as they are classed, by their language, among the Malay
nations) that when they came to this land, the head of the barangay, which is a boat, thus called – as is
discussed at length in the first chapter of the of the first ten chapters – became a dato. And so, even at the
present day, it is ascertained that this barangay in its origin was a family of parents and children, relations
and slaves. There were many of these barangays in each town, or, at least, on account of wars, they did
not settle far from one another. They were not, however, subject to one another except in friendship and
relationship. The chiefs, in their various wars, helped one another with their respective barangays.
In addition to the chiefs, who corresponded to our knights, there were three castes: nobles,
commoners, and slaves. The nobles were the free-born whom they call maharlica. They did not pay tax or
tribute to the dato, but must accompany him in war, at their own expense. The chief offered them
beforehand a feast, and afterward they divided the spoils. Moreover, when the dato went upon the water
those whom he summoned rowed for him. If he built a house, they helped him, and had to be fed for it.
The same was true when the whole barangay went to clear up his lands for tillage. The lands which they
inhabited were divided among the whole barangay, especially the irrigated portion, and thus each one
knew his own. No one belonging to another would cultivate them unless after purchase of inheritance.
The lands on the tingues, or mountain-ridges, are not divided, but owned in common by the barangay.
Consequently, at the time of the rice harvest, any individual of any particular barangay, although he may
have come from some other village, if he commences to clear any land may sow it, and no one can compel
him to abandon it. There are some villages (as, for example, Pila de la Laguna) in which these nobles, or
maharlicas, paid annually to the dato a hundred gantas of rice. The reason of this was that, at the time of
their settlement there, another chief occupied the lands, which the new chief, upon his arrival, bought
with his own gold; and therefore the members of his barangay paid him for the arable land, and he
divided it, among those whom he saw fit to reward. But now, since the advent of the Spaniards, it is not
so divided.
The chiefs in some villages had also fisheries, with established limits, and sections of the rivers for
markets. At these no one could fish, or trade in the markets, without paying for the privilege, unless he
belonged to the chief’s barangay or village.
The commoners are called aliping namamahay. They are married, and serve their master, whether he be
a dato or not, with half of their cultivated lands, as was agreed upon in the beginning. They accompanied
him whenever he went beyond the island, and rowed for him. They live in their own houses, and are
lords of their property and gold. Their children inherit it, and enjoy their property and lands. The
children, then, enjoy the rank of their fathers, and they cannot be made slaves (sa guiguilir) nor can either
parents or children be sold. If they should fall by inheritance into the hands of a son of their master who
was going to dwell in another village, they could not be taken from their own village and carried with
him; but they would remain in their native village, doing service there and cultivating the sowed lands.

38
3
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 9

The slaves are called aliping sa guiguilir. They serve their master in his house and on his cultivated lands,
and may be sold. The master grants them, should he see fit, and providing that he has profited through
their industry, a portion of their harvests, so that they may work faithfully. For these reasons, servants
who are born in the house of their master are rarely, if ever, sold. That is the lot of captives in war, and of
those brought up in the harvest fields.
Those to whom a debt was owed transferred the debt to another thereby themselves making a profit,
and reducing the wretched debtors to a slavery which was not their natural lot. If any person among
those who were made slaves (sa guiguilir) – through war, by the trade of goldsmith, or otherwise –
happened to possess any gold beyond the sum that he had to give his master, he ransomed himself,
becoming thus a namamahay, or what we call a commoner. The price of this ransom was never less than five
taels, as they might agree, he became wholly free. An amusing ceremony accompanied this custom. After
having divided all the trinkets which the slave possessed, if he maintained a house of his own, they
divided even the pots and jars, and if an odd one of these remained, they broke it; and if a piece of cloth
were left, they parted it in the middle.
The difference between the aliping namamahan and the alipinng sa guiguilir, should be noted: for, by a
confusion of the two terms, many have been classed as slaves who really are not. The Indians seeing that
the alcalde-mayor do not understand this, have adopted the custom of taking away the children of the
aliping namamahay, making use of them as they would of the aliping sa guiguilir, as servant in their
households, which is illegal, and if the aliping namamahay should appeal to justice, it is proved that he is
not an aliping as well as his father and mother before him no reservation is made as to whether he is
aliping namamahay or aliping sa guiguilir. He is at once considered alipin, without further declaration. In
this way he becomes a saguiguilir, and is even sold. Consequently, the alcaldes-mayor should be
instructed to ascertain, when anyone asks for his alipin, to which class he belongs, and to have the answer
put in the document that they give him.
In these three classes, those who are maharlicas on both the father’s and mother’s side continue to be
so forever; and if it happens that they should become slaves, it is through marriage, as I shall soon explain.
If these maharlicas had children among their slaves, the children and their mothers became free; if one of
them had children by the slave-woman of another, she was compelled, when pregnant, to give her master
half of a gold tael, because of her risk of death, and for her inability to labor during the pregnancy. In
such a case half of the child was free – namely, the half belonging to the father, who supplied the child
with food. If he did not do this, he showed that he did not recognize him as his child, in which case the
latter was wholly a slave. If a free woman had children by a slave, they were all free, provided he were
not her husband.
If two persons married, of whom one was a maharlica and the other a slave, whether namamahay or sa
guiguilir, the children were divided; the first, whether male or female, belonged to the father, as did the
third and fifth; the second, the fourth, and the sixth fell to the mother, and so on. In this manner, if the
father were free all those who belonged to him were slaves, and the same applied to the mother. If there
should not be more than one child he was half free and half slave. The only question here concerned the
division, whether the child were male or female. Those who became slaves fell under the category of
servitude which was their parent’s, either mamamahay or sa guiguilir. If there were an odd number of
children, the odd one was half free and half slave. I have not been able to ascertain with any certainty
when or at what age the division of children was made, for each one suited himself in this respect. Of
these two kinds of slaves the saguiguilir could be sold, but not the namamahay and their children, nor
could they be transferred. However, they could be transferred from the barangay by inheritance,
provided they remained in the same village.
The maharlicas could not, after marriage, move from one village to another, or from one barangay to
another, without paying a certain fine in gold, as arranged among them. This fine was larger or smaller
according to the inclination of the different villages, running from one to three taels and a banquet to the
entire barangay. Failure to pay the fine might result in a war between the barangay which the person left
and one which he entered. This applied equally to men and women, except that when one married a
woman in another village, the children were afterwards divided equally between the two barangays. This
arrangement kept them obedient to the dato, or chief, which is no longer the case – because, if the dato is
energetic and commands what the religious fathers enjoin him, they soon leave him and go to other
villages and other datos, who endure and protect them and do not order them about. This is the kind of
 39
4
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 0

dato that they now prefer not him who has the spirit to command. There is a great need of reform in this,
for the chiefs are spiritless and faint-hearted.
Investigations made and sentences passed by the dato must take place in the presence of those of his
barangay. If any of the litigants felt himself aggrieved, an arbiter was unanimously named from another
village or barangay, whether he were a dato or not, since they had for this purpose some persons, known
as fair and just men, who were said to give true judgment according to their customs. If the controversy
lay between two chiefs, when they wished to avoid war, they also convoked judges to act as arbiters; they
did the same if the disputants belonged to two different barangays. In this ceremony they always had to
drink, the plaintiff inviting the others.
They had laws by which they condemned a man follow birth who insulted the daughter or wife of a
child; likewise witches and others of the same class.
They condemned no one to slavery, unless he merited the death penalty. As for the witches, they called
them, and their children and accomplices became slaves of the chief, after he had made some recompense
to the injured person. All other offenses were punished by fines in gold, which, if not paid with
promptness, exposed the culprit to serve, until the payment should be made, the person aggrieved, to
whom the money was to be paid. This was done in the following way: Half the cultivated lands and all
their produce belonged to the master. The master provided the culprit with food and clothing, thus
enslaving the culprit and his children, and should be paid therefor. In this way he kept possession of the
children if the payment could not be met. This last was usually the case, and they remained slaves. If the
culprit had some relative or friend who paid for him, he was obliged to render the latter half his service
until he was paid- not, however, service within the house as aliping sa guiguilir, but living independently,
as aliping namamahay. If the creditor were not served in this wise, the culprit had to pay the double of
what was let him. In this way slaves were made by debt: either sa guiguilir, if they served the master to
whom the judgment applied; or aliping namamahay, if they served the person who let them wherewith to
pay.
In what concerns loans, there was formerly, and is today, an excess of usury, which is great hindrance
to baptism as well as to confession; for it turns out in the same way as I have showed in the case of the
one under judgment, who gives half of his cultivated lands and profits until he pays the debt. The debtor
is condemned to a life of toil; and thus borrower becomes slaves, and after the death of the father the
children pay the debt. Not doing so, double the amount must be paid. This system should and can be
reformed.
As for inheritances, the legitimate children of father and mother inherited equality, except in the case
where the father and mother showed a slight partiality by such gifts as two three gold taels, or perhaps a
jewel.
When the parents gave a dowry to any son, when, in order to marry him to a chief’s daughter, the
dowry was greater than the sum given the other sons, the excess was not counted in the whole property
to be divided. Any other thing that should have been given to any son, though it might be for some
necessity, was taken into consideration at the time of the partition of the property, unless the parents
should declare that such a bestowal was made outside of the inheritance. If one had had children by two
or more legitimate wives, each child received the inheritance and dowry of his mother, with its increase,
and that share of his father’s estate which fell to him out of the whole. If a man had a child by one of his
slaves, as well as legitimate children, the former had no share in the inheritance; but the legitimate
children were bound to free the mother, and to give him something – a tael or a slave, if the father were a
chief; or if, finally, anything else were given it was by the unanimous consent of all. If besides the
legitimate children, he had also some sons by a free unmarried woman, to whom a dowry was given but
who was not considered a real wife, all these were classed as natural children, although the child by the
unmarried woman should have been begotten after his marriage. Such children did not inherit equally
with the legitimate children, but only the third part. For example, if there were two children, the
legitimate one had two parts, and the one of the inaasaya one part. When there were no children by a
legitimate wife, but only children by an unmarried woman, or inaasaya, the latter inherited all. If he had a
child by a slave woman, that child received his share as above stated. If there were no legitimate or
natural child, or a child by an inaasaya, whether there was a son of a slave woman or not, the inheritance
went only to the father or grandparents, brothers, or nearest relatives of the deceased, who gave to the

40
4
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 1

slave-child as above stated.

In the case of a child by a free married woman, born while she was married, if the husband punished the
adulterer this was considered a dowry; and the child entered with the others into partition in the
inheritance. His share equaled the part left by the father, nothing more. If there were no other sons than
he, the children and the nearest relatives inherited equally with him. If the adulterers were not punished
by the husband of the woman who had the child, the latter was not considered as his child, nor did he
inherit anything. It should be noticed that the offender was not considered dishonored by the punishment
inflicted, nor did the husband leave the woman. By the punishment of the father the child was fittingly
made legitimate.
Adopted children, of whom there are many among them, inherit the double of what was paid for
their adoption. For example, if one gold tael was given that he might be adopted when the first father
died, the child was given [inheritance] two taels. But if this child should die first, his children do not
inherit from the second father, for the arrangement stops at that point.
This is the danger to which his money is exposed, as well as his being protected as a child. On this
account this manner of adoption common among them is considered lawful.
Dowries are given by the men to the women’s parents. If the latter are living, they enjoy the use of it.
At their death, provided the dowry has not been consumed, it is divided like the rest of the estate, equally
among the children, except in case the father should care to bestow something additional upon the
daughter. If the wife at the time of her marriage, has neither father, mother, nor grandparents, she enjoys
her dowry – which, in such a case, belongs to no other relative or child. It should be noticed that
unmarried women can own no property, in land or dowry, for the result of all their labors accrues to their
parents.
In the case of a divorce before the birth of children, if the wife left the husband for the purpose of
marrying another, all her dowry and an equal additional amount fell to the husband; but if she left him,
and did not marry another, the dowry was returned. When the husband left his wife, he lost half of the
dowry, and the other half was returned to him. If he possessed children at the same time of his divorce,
the whole dowry and the fine went to the children, and was held for them by their grandparents or other
responsible relatives.
I have also seen another practice in two villages. In one case, upon the death of the wife who in a
year’s time had borne no children, the parents returned one-half the dowry to the husband whose wife
had died. In the other case, upon the death of the husband, one-half the dowry was returned to the
relatives of the husband. I have ascertained that this is not a general practice; for upon inquiry I learned
that when this is done it is done through piety, and that all do not do it.
In the matter of marriage dowries which fathers bestow upon their sons when they are about to be
married, and half of which is given immediately, even when they are only children, there is a great deal
more complexity. There is a fine stipulated in the contract, that he who violates it shall pay a certain sum
which varies according to the practice of the village and the affluence of the individual. The fine was
heaviest if, upon the death of the parents, the son or daughter should be unwilling to marry because it
had been arranged by his or her parents. In this case the dowry which the parents had received was
returned and nothing more. If the parents were living, they paid the fine, because it was assumed that it
had been their design to separate the children.
The above is what I have been able to ascertain clearly concerning customs observed among those natives
in all this Laguna and the tingues, and among the entire Tagalog race. The old men say that a dato who did
anything contrary to this would not be esteemed: and, in relating tyrannies which they had committed,
some condemned them and adjudged they wicked.
Others, perchance, may offer a more extended narrative, but leaving aside irrelevant matters
concerning government and justice among them, a summary of the whole truth is contained in the above.
I am sending the account in this clear and concise form because I had received no orders to pursue the
work further. Whatever may be decided upon, it is certainly important that it should be given to the
alcaldes-mayor, accompanied by an explanation; for the absurdities which are to be found in their
opinions are indeed pitiable.
May our Lord bestow upon your Lordship His grace and spirit’ so that in every step good fortune
may be yours; and upon every occasion may your Lordship deign to consider me your humble servant, to

41
4
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 2

be which would be the greatest satisfaction and favor that I could receive. Nagcarlan, October 21, 1589.

The Worship of the Tagalogs

In all villages, or in other parts of the Filipinas Islands, there are not temples consecrated to the
performing of sacrifices, the adoration of their idols, or the general practice of idolatry. It is true that they
have the name simbahan, which means a temple or place of adoration; but this is because, formerly, when
they wished to celebrate a festival, which they call pandot, or “worship,” they celebrated it in the large
house of a chief. There they constructed, for the purpose of sheltering the assembled people, a temporary
shed on each side of the house, with a roof, called sibi, to protect the people from the wet when it rained.
They so constructed the house that it might contain many people – dividing it, after the fashion of ships,
into three compartments. On the posts of the house they set small lamps, called sorihile; in the center of the
house they placed one large lamp, adorned with leaves of the white palm, wrought into many designs.
They also brought together many drums, large and small, which they beat successively while the feast
lasted, which was usually four days. During this time the whole barangay, or family, united and joined in
the worship which they call nagaanitos. The House, for the above-mentioned period of time, was called a
temple.
Among the many idols there was one called Bathala, whom they especially worshiped? The title,
seems to signify “all powerful,” or “maker of all things.” They also worshiped the sun, which, on account
of its beauty, is almost universally respected and honored by heathens. They worshiped, too, the moon,
especially when it was new, at which time they held great rejoicings, adoring it and bidding it welcome.
Some of them also adored the stars, although they did not know them by their names, as the Spaniards
and other nations know the planets – with the one exception of the morning star, which they called Tala.
They knew, too, the “seven little goats” [Pleiades] – as we call them – and, consequently, the change of
seasons, which they call Mapolon; and Balatic, which is our Greater Bear. They possessed many idols
called lic-ha, which were images with different shapes; and at times they worshipped any little trifle, in
which they adored, as did the Romans, some particular dead man who was brave in war and endowed
with special faculties, to whom they commended themselves for protection in their tribulations. They had
another idol called Dian masalanta, who was the patron of loves and of generation. The idols called
Lacapati and Idianale were the patrons of the cultivated lands and of husbandry. They paid reverence to
water-lizards called by them buaya, or crocodiles, from fear of being harmed by them. They were even in
the habit of offering these animals a portion of what they carried in their boats, by throwing it into the
water, or placing it upon the bank.
They were, moreover, over liable to find auguries in thins they witnessed. For example, if they left
their house and met on the way a serpent or rat, or a bird called tigmamanuguin which was singing in the
tree, or if they chanced upon anyone who sneezed, they returned at once to their house, considering the
incident as an augury that some evil might befall them if they should continue their journey – especially
when the above-mentioned bird sang. This song had two different forms: in the one case it was
considered as an evil omen; in the other, as a good omen, and then they continue their journey. They also
practiced divination, to see whether weapons, such as a dagger or knife, were to be useful and lucky for
their possessor whenever occasion should offer.
These natives had no established division of years, months, and days; these are determined by the
cultivation of the soil, counted by moons, and the different effect produced upon the trees when yielding
flowers, fruits, and leaves: all this helps them in making up the year. The winter and summer are
distinguished as sun-time and water-time - the latter term designating winter in those regions, where
there is no cold, snow, or ice.
It seems, however, that now since they have become Christians, the seasons are not quite the same,
for at Christmas it gets somewhat cooler. The years, since the advent of the Spaniards, have been
determined by the latter, and the seasons have been given their proper names, and they have been
divided into weeks.
Their manner of offering sacrifice was to proclaim a feast, and offer to the devil what they had to eat.
This was done in front of the idol, which they anoint with fragrant perfumes, such as musk and civet, or
gum of the storax-tree and other odoriferous woods, and praise it in poetic sons sung by the officiating
priest, male or female, who is called catolonan. The participants made responses to the song, beseeching
the idol to favor them with those things of which they were in need, and generally, by offering repeated

42
4
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 3

health, they all became intoxicated. In some of their idolatries they were accustomed to place a good piece
of cloth, doubled, over the idol, and over the cloth a chain or large gold ring, thus worshipping the devil
without having sight of him. The devil was sometimes liable to enter into the body of the catolonan, and,
assuming her shape and appearance, filled her with so great arrogance – he being the cause of it – that she
seemed to shoot flames from her eyes; her hair stood on end, a fearful sight to those beholding, and she
uttered words of arrogance and superiority. In some districts, especially in the mountains, when in those
idolatries the devil incarnated himself and took on the form of his minister, the latter had to be tied to a
tree by his companions, to prevent the devil in his infernal fury from destroying him. This, however,
happened but rarely. The objects of sacrifice were goats, fowls, and swine, which were flayed, decapitated,
and laid before the idol. They performed another ceremony by cooking a jar of rice until the water was
evaporated, after which they broke the jar, and the rice was left as an intact mass which was set before the
idol; and all about it, at intervals, were placed a few buyos – which is a small fruit wrapped in a leaf with
some lime, a food generally eaten in these regions – as well as fried food and fruits. All these above-
mentioned articles were eaten by the guests at the feast; the heads [of the animals], after being ‘offered,’ as
they expressed it, were cooked and eaten also.
The reasons for offering this sacrifice and adoration were, in addition to whatever personal matters
there might be, the recovery of a sick person, the prosperous voyage of those embarking on the sea, a
good harvest in the sowed lands, a propitious result in wars, a successful delivery in childbirth, and a
happy outcome in married life. If this took place among people of rank, the festivities lasted thirty days.
In the case of young girls who first had their monthly courses, their eyes were blindfolded four days
and four nights; and, in the meantime, the friends and relatives were all invited to partake of food and
drink. At the end of this period, the catolonan took the young girl to the water, bathed her and washed her
head, and removed the bandage from her eyes. The old men said that they did this in order that the girls
might bear children, and have fortune in finding husbands to their taste, who would not leave them
widows in their youth.
The distinctions made among the priests of the devil were as follows: The first, called catolonan, as
above stated, was either a man or a woman. This office was an honorable one among the natives, and was
held ordinarily by people of rank, this rule being general in all the islands.
The second they called mangagauay, or witches who deceived by pretending to heal the sick. These
priests even induced maladies by their charms, which in proportion to the strength and efficacy of the
witchcraft, are capable of causing death. In this way, if they wished to kill at once they did so; or they
could prolong life for a year by binding to the waist a live serpent, which was believed to be the devil, or
at least his substance. This office was general throughout the land. The third they called manyisalat, which
is the same as mangagauay. These priests had the power of applying such remedies to lovers that they
would abandon and despise their own wives, and in fact could prevent them from having intercourse
with the latter. If the woman, constrained by these means, were abandoned, it would bring sickness upon
her, and on account of the desertion she would discharge blood and matter. This office was also general
throughout the land.
 The fourth was called mancocolam, whose duty it was to emit fire from himself at night, once or
oftener each month. This fire could not be extinguished; nor could it be thus be emitted except as the
priest wallowed in the ordure and filth which falls from the houses; and he who lived the house where
the priest was wallowing in order to emit this fire from himself, fell ill and died. This office was general.
The fifth was called hocloban, which is another kind of witch, of greater efficacy than the mangagauay.
Without the use of medicine, and by simply saluting or raising the hand, they killed whom they chose. If
they desired to heal those whom they had made ill by their charms, they did so by using other charms.
Moreover, if they wished to destroy the house of some Indian hostile to them, they were able to do so
without instruments. This was in Catanduanes, an island off the upper part of Luzon.
The sixth was called silagan, whose office it was, if they saw anyone clothed in white, to tear out his
liver and eat it, thus causing his death. This, like the preceding, was in the island of Catanduanes. Let no
one, moreover, consider this a fable; because, in Calayan, they tore out in this way through the anus all
the intestines of a Spanish notary, who was buried in Calilaya by father Fray Juan de Merida.
The seventh was called magtatangal, and his purpose was to show himself at night to many persons,
without his head or entrails. In such wise the devil walked about carried, or pretended to carry, his head

43
4
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 4
to different places and, in the morning, returned it to his body – remaining, as before, alive. This seems
to me to be a fable, although the natives affirm that they have seen it, because the devil probably caused
them so to believe. This occurred in Catanduanes.
The eighth they called osuang, which is equivalent to ‘sorcerer;” they say that they have seen him fly,
and that he murdered men and ate their flesh. This was among the Visayas Islands; among the Tagalogs
these did not exist.
The ninth was another class of witches called mangagayoma. They made charms for lovers out of
herbs, stones, and wood, which would infuse the heart with love. Thus did they deceive the people,
although sometimes, through the intervention of the devil, they gained their ends?
The tenth was known as sonat, which is equivalent to “preacher.” It was his office to help one to die,
at which time he predicted the salvation or condemnation of the soul. It was not lawful for the functions
of this office to be fulfilled by other than people of high standing on account of the esteem in which it
was held. This office was general throughout the islands.
The eleventh, pangatahohan, was a soothsayer, and predicted the future. This office was general in all
the islands.
The twelfth, bayoguin, signified a “cotquean,” a man whose nature inclined toward that of a woman.
Their manner of burying the dead was as follows: The deceased was buried beside his house; and, if he
were a chief, he was placed beneath a little house or porch which they constructed for this purpose.
Before interring him, they mourned him for four days; and afterward laid him on a boat which served
as a coffin or bier, placing him beneath the porch, where guard was kept over him by a slave. In place
of rowers, various animals were placed within the boat, each one being assigned a place at the oar by
twos – male and female of each species being together – as for example two goats, two deer, or two
fowls. It was the slave’s care to see that they were fed. If the deceased had been a warrior, a living slave
was tied beneath his body until in this wretched way he died. In course of time, all suffered decay; and
for many days the relatives of the dead man bewailed him, singing dirges, and praises of his good
qualities, until finally they wearied of it. This grief was also accompanied by eating and drinking. This
was a custom of the Tagalogs.
The Aetas or Negrillos [Negritos] inhabitants of this island, had also a form of burial, but different.
They dug a deep, perpendicular hole, and placed the deceased within it, leaving him upright with head
or crown unburied, on top of which they put half a coconut which was to serve him as a shield. Then
they went in pursuit of some Indian, whom they killed in retribution for the Negrillo who had died. To
this end they conspired together, hanging a certain token of their necks until some one of them
procured the death of the innocent one.
These infidels said that they knew that there was another life of rest which they called maca, just as if
we should say ‘paradise,” or, in other words, “village of rest.” They say that those who go to this place
are the just, and the valiant, and those who lived without doing harm, or who possessed other moral
virtues. They said also that in the other life and mortality, there was a place of punishment, grief, and
affliction, called casanaan, which was “a place of anguish;” they also maintained that no one would go to
heaven, where there dwelt only Bathala, “the maker of all things,” who governed from above. There
were also other pagans who confessed more clearly to a hell, which they called, as I have said, casanaan;
they said that all the wicked went to that place, and there dwelt the demons, whom they called sitan.
All the various kinds of infernal ministers were, therefore as has been stated: catolonan; sonat (who
was a sort of bishop who ordained priestesses and received their reverence, for they knelt before him as
before one who could pardon sins, and expected salvation through him); mangagauay, manyisalat,
mancocolam, hocloban, silagan, magtatangal, osuan, mangagayoma, pangathahoan.
There were also ghosts, which they called vibit; and phantoms, which they called tigbalaang. They had
another deception – namely, that if any woman died in childbirth, she and the child suffered
punishment; and that, at night she could be heard lamenting. This was called pantianac. May the honor
and glory be God our Lord’s, that among all the Tagalogs not a trace of this is left; and that those who
are now marrying do not even know what it is, thanks to the preaching of the holy gospel, which has
banished it.

Blair, E.H. & Robertson, J.A (2004). Juan de Plasencia, Customs of the Tagalogs. In The Philippine Island,
 1493-1898 (Vol.7) (pp.165-1987). Retrieved from
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/13701/13701-h/13701-h.htm#d0e1500

44
4
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 5 45

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 46

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 47

Assessment # ______
Analyzing A Written Source

Name: __________________________________ Score: ________ Course & Year Level:

________________________ Date: __________

I – Identifying the Source and Context of the Document

 1. Title:
________________________________________________________________________ 2.
Author(s): ______________________________________________________________ 3.
Date of writing and/or publication: ________________________________________ 4.
Place written and/or published: ___________________________________________ 5.
Type of document: _____________________________________________________ 6.
Author’s purpose of writing: _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________ __
________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________

II – Analyzing the Contents of the Document

1. Main subject of document
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________.
2. Key social/political topics discussed
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________ 3.
Personal values/biases revealed
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 48

4. Suspected errors or misleading statements

________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
 _______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
__________________________________

III – Evaluating Source

1. Is the source reliable? Explain
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

2. Is the source useful? Explain

_______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

3. What can be learned from this document

_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 49

4. Evaluating our pre-Hispanic culture that did not perpetuate until today. a. What
were the customs of the Tagalogs, on account of de Plasencia’s work, that
did not perpetuate until today?
_____________________________________________________________________________
 ____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

b. What could be the reasons for the death of these customary ways?
_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 50

Reading #3: Kartilya ng Katipunan by Emilio Jacinto

Historical Context of the Documents

allegedly smuggling a subversive black book
upon his entry in Manila from Hong Kong.
The Katipunan or KKK The underground society was founded by a
(Kagalanggalang na Katipunan nang manga group of progressive thinking men, namely,
Anak nang Bayan) was founded on the night Andres Bonifacio, Valentin Diaz, Teodoro
of July 7, 1892, the day of Jose Rizal’s arrest Plata, Ladislao Diwa, Deodato Arellano
and deportation to Dapitan later on for among others who were either fundraisers
of the Propaganda Movement in Spain, local
propagandists and businessmen (Agoncillo
and Guerrero, 1977, p.195). The founding of
the Katipunan came as the prospect of
reforms aspired for by the Propaganda
Movement in Spain was already waning.
Short of funds, with its key figures at odds
with strategy, La Solidaridad was not able to
generate as much sentiment from the
Spanish politicians and bureaucrats to craft a
law in the Spanish Cortes in order to make
us a province of Spain and institute reforms
in the Philippines. La Solidaridad was still in
operation by 1892 at the time of Rizal’s
arrest and Katipunan’s founding. It only
stopped printing by 1895 and with the death
of Marcelo del Pilar and Graciano Lopez
Jaena in 1896, the aim of uniting the
Filipinos on one solid stand against Spain
was not fully attained. The founding of the
Katipunan also came with the inspiration
generated by Rizal’s Noli Me Tangere and El
Filibusterismo. The two novels awakened the
sentiment of Filipinos to re-think their
position as to the yoke that they were
carrying while under Spain.
Those who chose to be a member of
the Katipunan had to be taught of the values
it upheld. A recruit could enter into the
organization through a secret networking
process that involved a triangular system
where a member would recruit at least two
members who would end up not knowing
each other except the recruiter for in the
middle of night that would have their
meetings, they were wearing hoods so as not
to divulge their identities. The organization
had only three ranks unlike a military
hierarchy which had a general down to the
corporal. A recruit enters the organization
used from 1892 to 1894. Jacinto entered the
organization in 1894 and wrote his Kartilya.
Having read Jacinto’s Kartilya, Bonifacio
chose to have Jacinto’s version be the official
material to teach their doctrines for reason of
its beautifully crafted language.
Reproduced in a booklet, Kartilya, is not
given for free but is given to new members
upon payment of a membership fee of 4
with the rank of a Katipon and wore a black
hood with Anak ng Bayan as password. After
the Katipon had recruited a number of
members, he could be promoted into Kawal
donned with green hood and known to have
a password Gomburza. A kawal can be
promoted to the highest rank Bayani and
could entitle him to be elected into the
Council, a position where he could wear a
red mask and could interact with a
password Rizal. Since the recruitment was in
secret, they met at night hooded.
But the recruitment was slow that in
October 1892, three months after its
founding, Bonifacio changed it to open
recruitment with the intention of bringing in
as many members as they could get, and
removing their embellishments during their
assemblies (Agoncillo and Guerrero, 1977,
pp. 172-173).
The Katipunan was structured
almost like a government with three
governing assemblies, the highest of which
being the Supreme Council (Katatastaasang
Sanggunian) composed of the elected
president, fiscal, secretary, treasurer and
comptroller. The leadership structure is
replicated in the second highest assembly,
the Provincial Council (Sangguniang Bayan)
and replicated still in the Municipal Council
(Sangguniang Balangay). It also had its
Judicial Council (Sangguniang Hukuman)
which tried members in violation of its rules
(Agoncillo and Guerrero, 1977, pp.170-171).
To those who wished to join the
organization, they had to be initiated and
indoctrinated into its teachings. Bonifacio
had his version of these teachings, the
Decalogue. This could have been probably
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 51
pesos (Richardson, 2013, p.129).
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Emilio Jacinto may have been the
youngest member to have entered the
organization in 1894 at the age of 19. He was
born in Tondo on December 15, 1875. He
was son to Mariano Jacinto and Josefa Dizon.
 He earned his Bachelor of Arts in San Juan
de Letran and later enrolled at the
University of Santo Tomas to study law
which he did while dividing his time in
revolutionary work having been elected
fiscal in early 1895, secretary in December
1896, and secretary of war in August 1896.
He was the editor of Kalayaan,the newspaper
of the Katipunan and became a general in
charge of the war campaign in Laguna
(Agoncillo and Guerrero, 1977, pp. 171172).
Born with humble means, Andres
Bonifacio was born on December 2, 1863 to
Catalina de Castro and Santiago Bonifacio in
an environment characterized with poverty.
Believing that children are a source of
wealth, the couple added four more children:
Ciriaco, Procopio, Expiridiona, Troadio, and
Maxima (Agoncillo, 1956, p. 65).
Though life was difficult to come by,
Andres was sent to study under Maestro
Guillermo Osmeña but the boy reached only
primary school when his mother and later
his father died, leaving only him to earn a
living and take care of the family. In order to
sustain the family, he made tungkod and
abanico which he sold in Tutuban. Late in his
teen, he was employed as clerk-messenger in
Fleming and Co. He was promoted as agent
selling rattan, tar and other commodities.
His salary was not enough so he
transferred employment to Fresnell and Co.
as a bodigero, more like an account executive
today, taking care of accounts and liaising
with clients, while still making fans and
canes in his free time. He was a self-made
man, who earned quite an amount of money
to buy him coat and tie which only the
middle class can afford (Agoncillo, 1956, p.
66). According to his childhood friend, Gen.
Guillermo Masangkay, he was earning
₱25.00 a month (Masangkay, 1990, p. 309).
He was self-learned he who mastered a
good penmanship and read books such as
The Wandering Jew, Noli Me Tangere, and El
Filibusterismo (both in Spanish), Les
Miserables, International Law, Penal and Civil
Code, The Ruins of Palmyra, and The Lives of
the Presidents of the United States of America
(Agoncillo, 1956, p. 67).
As a young man, he joined his
friends in establishing Teatro Porvenir in the
locality where he was able to master Tagalog
by memorizing lines. He married a lady by
his neighborhood Monica but she died of
leprosy. In 1872, at the time when Katipunan
was to be founded, he fell in love with
Oriang (Gregoria de Jesus) from Kalookan. It
took a year before her parents could give her
hands for marriage for they knew he was
Mason. (Agoncillo, 1956, p. 71). With the
establishment of the Katipunan, the
Decalogue which he penned became the
primary teaching tool for values until
Jacinto’s version came along and the
Kartilya became the official organ for
teaching values to the members (Agoncillo,
1956, p. 71).

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 52 Teachings of the Katipunan of the Sons of the People

A life that is not dedicated to a great and sacred cause is like a tree without a shade, or a poisonous weed. A good deed
lacks virtue if it springs from a desire for personal profit and not from a sincere desire to do good. True charity renders in acts
of compassion, in love for one’s fellow men, and in making true Reason the measure of every move, deed, and word.
Be their skin dark or pale, all men are equal. One can be superior to another in knowledge, wealth, and beauty… but not
in being.
A person with a noble character values honor above self-interest, while a person with an ignoble character values self-
interest above honor.
An honorable man’s word is his bond.
Don’t waste time; lost wealth may be recovered, but time lost is lost forever.
Defend the oppressed and fight the oppressor.
An intelligent man is he who takes care in everything he says and keeps quiet about what must be kept secret. Along the
thorny path of life, the man leads the way and his wife and children follow. If the leader goes the way of perdition, then do so
those who are led.
Do not regard a woman as a mere plaything, but as a helpmate and partner in the hardships of this existence. Have due
regard to her weakness, and remember the mother who brought you into this world and nurtured you in your infancy.
What you would not want done to your wife, daughter, and sister, do not do to the wife, daughter, and sister of another.
A man’s worth does not come from him being a king or in the height of his nose and the whiteness of his face, or in him
being a priest, a REPRESENTATIVE OF GOD, or in his exalted position on the face of this earth. Pure and truly noble is he
who, though born in the forest and able to speak only his own tongue, behaves decently, is true to his word, has dignity and
honor, who is not an oppressor and does not abet oppressors, who knows how to cherish and look after the land of his birth.
When these doctrines have spread and the brilliant sun of beloved liberty shines on these poor Islands, and sheds its
sweet light upon a united race, a people in everlasting happiness, then the lives lost, the struggle and the suffering will have
been more than recompensed. If the applicant understands all these, and believes he will be able to fulfill these duties, he
should put his request in writing as follows:
Having fully understood the principles and teachings proclaimed by the Katipunan of the sons of the People, I wish with
heart and soul to become a member. Respectfully, therefore, I beg to be deemed worthy of admission and to be counted as
one of the sons of the association, and I pledge to comply teachings with its and submit to its Orders.
=========================================================================================================
Decalogue

Extract from “Katungkulang gagawin ng mga Z.Ll.B.” (The “Decalogue”), c.1896” by Andres Bonifacio, with studies and
notes by Jim Richardson in Katipunan: Documents and Studies Reprinted with permission by Jim Richardson as indicated
in his website.

Duties of the sons of the people

1. Love God with all your heart.
2. Bear in mind that the love of God is also love of Country, and this too is the love one’s fellowmen. 3. Engrave in your
heart that the true measure of honor and happiness is to die for the freedom of your country. 4. All your good wishes will
be crowned with success if you have serenity, constancy, reason, and faith in your acts and endeavor.
5. Guard the mandates and aims of the K.K.K. as you guard your honor.
6. It is the duty of all to defend, at the risk of their own lives, and wealth, anyone who runs great risks in the performance
of his duty.
7. Our responsibility to ourselves and the performance of our duties will be the example set for our fellowmen to follow.
8. Insofar as it is within your power, share your means with the poor and the unfortunate. 9. Diligence in the work that
gives sustenance to you is the true basis of love – love your own self, for your wife and children, and for your brothers
and countrymen.
10. Punish the scoundrel and traitor and praise all good work. Believe, likewise, that the aims of the K.K.K. are God-
given, for the will of the people is also the will of God.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 53

Assessment # 5:
Kartilya ng Katipunan by Emilio Jacinto

Name: ____________________________ Score:__________ Year/Section:

______________________ Date:_ ____________

1. Give three reasons why the Kartilya ng Katipunan is important to the grand narrative
of Philippine History.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
 ___________________________________________________________________________

2. Identifying the values that we need or lack in order for us to become dignified and
noble citizens of our nation.
Complete the matrices below by supplying the values that we need in order to
create a dignified society and nation which can be derived from the Jacinto’s Kartilya
and Bonifacio’s Decalogue. On the left column, write the teachings and on the right side,
derive the values.

Teachings of Jacinto’s Kartilya Values that we need as a nation

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 54

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.
 12.

13.

Teachings of Bonifacio’s Decalogue Values that we need as a nation

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 55

CONTENT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED

PRIMARY SOURCES
 “THE ACT OF PROCLAMATION OF INDEPENDENCE OF THE FILIPINO
PEOPLE”
(ACTA DELA PROCLAMACION DELA INDEPENDENCIA DEL PUEBLO FILIPINO)

Learning outcome

At the end of the lesson you should able to:

1. Discuss the context and perspective of the document

2. Explain how the Philippines achieved its independence from Spanish colonial rule
3. Examine the state of Philippine independence today

Historical context

The first phase of the Philippine Revolution ended in a stalemate between the Spaniards
and the Filipino rebels. In December 1897, a truce was declared between the two forces with the
Filipino leaders, led by Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo, agreeing to be exiled to Hong Kong while the
Spaniards paid an indemnity for the damages caused as a result of the conflict. The truce,
however, lasted for only a few months before it collapses. The renewed conflict would have
been disastrous for the Filipinos if not for the deteriorating diplomatic relations between Spain
and the United States over another revolution in Cuba. This eventually led to the Spanish
American War in 1898 and the arrival of a new colonizer to the Philippines—theAmericans

Even before the Battle of Manila in 189 8, Aguinaldo had already been meeting with the
Americans in Singapore. He talked with consul E. Spencer Pratt regarding US Filipino
collaboration against the Spaniards before he went back to Hong Kong to meet up with
Commodore George Dewey, commander of the Asiatic Fleet. Unfortunately, Dewey had
already left for the Philippines to attack the Spanish fleet following America’s declaration of
war against Spain in April.
Aguinaldo remained in Hong Kong and met with the American consul general Rounseville
Wildman. He paid Wildman a total of P117, 000 to purchase rifles and ammunition. A first
shipment worth P50, 000 was made but the other half was never delivered. Wildman never
returned the money given to him
On May 19, 1898, Aguinaldo finally returned to the Philippines on board the U.S. cruiser
Mc Collock. Aguinaldo conferred with Dewey on Philippine conditions and was supplied with
arms captured from the Spaniards. From his headquarters in Cavite, Aguinaldo announced the
resumption of the revolution against the Spaniards, thus beginning the second phase of the i
evolution. The Filipinos immediately flocked to the province to jointhe army. By the end of May,
Aguinaldo was in command of army of 12,000 troops.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 56

On May 28, the Filipino forces won their first victory to Alapan, Imus. The newly made
Filipino flag was hoisted in Alapan then later unfurled at the Teatro Cavitefio in Cavite Nuevo
(now Cavite City) in front of the Filipinos and captured Spanish soldiers. A group of
American officers and soldiers also witnessed the ceremony.

Earlier, On May 24, Aguinaldo announced the creation of the dictatorial government. The
formation of this type of rule was a necessity when the growing nation needed a strong leader.
He emphasized that the dictatorship was only temporary as it would be a prelude to the
establishment of a republican form of government.

On June 12, 1898, Aguinaldo declared Philippine independence from Spanish rule at a
ceremony in his house in Kawit, Cavite. Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista read the declaration that
was later signed by 177 persons, including an American military officer. The Philippine
National Anthem, then known as “Marcha Nacional Filipina,” composed by Julian Felipe, was
played by the Banda de San Francisco de Malabon and the Philippine flag was again unfurled.

About the Author

(Although the actual author of the proclamation was

Ambrosio
Rianzares Bautista, the initiator of Philip pine
independence that led
to the making of the proclamation was Gen. Emilio
Aguinaldo.)

Emilio Aguinaldo was born on March 22, 1869

in Kawit,
Cavite (Cavite el Viejo), and the second to the
youngest of
eight children o1 Carlos Aguinaldo and Trinidad Famy. The
Aguinaldos were a wealthy and influential family with Carlos
being gobernadorcillo for several terms. Following his father’s
death in 1883, Emilio assisted his mother in the family business
and worked to help earn the family income.
Aguinaldo followed in his father’s footsteps and was chosen
capitan municipal of Kawit in 1894. Months later, he joined the Katipunan choosing the name
Magdalo, a name that was also given to another branch of the Katipunan (the other was the
Magdiwang) which he set up in his province.
When the revolution began in 1896, the Katipunan in Cavite succeeded in driving
away the Spaniards from the province. But territorial and logistical problems between the
two groups soon forced Aguinaldo to ask for help from 5upremo Andres Bonifacio in
settling the conflict. Bonifacio’s intervention, however, only worsened the situation and the
only solution the two factions saw was to create a revolutionary government.

Elections for a pamahalaang panghihimagsik were held in Barrio Tejeros, San Francisco de
Trias) with
Malabon (now General on March 22, 1897. Aguinaldo was elected President
Mariano
Trias (Vice-President), Artemio Ricarte (Captain General) Emiliano Riego de Dios
were
(Director of War), and Andress Bonifacio (Director of the Interior). But the elections
disrupted following a protest over Bonifacio’s educational qualification for such a position.
the result
Bonifacio angrily declared of the elections null and void and walked out. The
Magdalos, was
however, considered the election binding and the new government founded.

When Bonifacio tried to put up his own government with an armed group, lie was arrested
and tried for sedition. Found guilty, the Supremo and his brother Procopio were executed on
May 10,1897.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 57

The the
internal dissent caused by Bonifacio’s death weakened Katipunan further. The
Aguinaldo
Spanish troops regained Cavite and was forced to retreat to the mountains of Biak na
Bato. But in their
the Spaniards soon realized that going after the rebels mountain hideout was
by
futile. A stalemate ensued broken only a truce proposal to which the rebels agreed. In
for an
exchange indemnity, amnesty, and colonial reform, Aguinaldo and his officers went into
exile in Hong Kong in December 1897.
 The Spanish-American War in 1898 eventually changed Philippine history. After the
Americans won the Battle of Manila Bay in 1898, Aguinaldo returned to the Philippines with
their help and announced the resumption of the revolution against Spain. After winning
several victories against the Spaniards, he declared Philippine independence on June 12, 1898.
But the Filipinos soon realized that the Americans were to become their new
colonizers. After the Spanish defeat in 1898, the United States began to send Fresh troops
to the Philippines. In 1899, Aguinaldo convened a Congress in Malolos, Bulacan in which
the delegates wrote a Constitution and established the Philippine Republic with Aguinaldo
as President in January 1899.
Three weeks later, the continuing friction
with the Americans erupted into a conflict in
February 1899. The Philippine- American War
eventually ended in 1901 with the capture of
Aguinaldo. Soon after, he pledged allegiance to the
United States and returned to private life on his
family farm. He briefly hugged the limelight when
he ran for the presidency of the Philippine presidency
of the Philippine Commonwealth but lost to
Manuel L. Quezon,
Aguinaldo was charged with collaboration by the Americans for helping the Japanese
during World War II but was later freed in a general amnesty. As a private citizen, he devoted
his time to the cause of veteran revolucionarios until his death at the age of 94 on February 6,
1964.

Declaration of Philippine Independence

About the Text

On June 10, 1896, Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo issued a one-sentence decree appointing his
Auditor General of War, Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista, as a "special commissioner" to write the
Act of the Declaration of the Independence. The result was a sixteen-page document that
contained the aspirations of freedom from Spanish rule, the sacrifices made, and the revolution
that resulted from it. It was the text of this declaration that was read in Kawit in the afternoon of
the celebration of the declaration of independence. Copies of the document were made and
distributed. However, there was a problem in determining how many witnesses really signed
the declaration. The copies classified under Philippine Revolutionary Papers (PRP) in the
National Library had varying numbers. Later research by historian-writer Jim Richardson
placed the total number of signees at 177.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

58
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 59
Relevant
Nothing is more relevant to Philippine history than the declaration of
independence from colonial rule. The Declaration is, of course, that sole document
that proves the value Filipinos place on their freedom. At present, our independence
has been questioned especially in relation to our dealings with the United States
(which colonized us for almost half a century and later recognized our
independence in 1946). However, it must be understood that the independence we
attained in 1898 was freedom that was fought for with the lives of Filipinos. The
goal or objective of this independence, however, is something that we might have
failed to achieve and protect properly. It in this context that the Acta must be studied
again

References:
Batis: Source in the Philippine History’; Jose Victor Torres; Published in 2018 by C&E publishing 839 EDSA,
South Triangle, Quezon City, Copyright 2018 by C & E Publishing, Inc. and Jose Victor Torres

Assessment # ______

Name: __________________________________ Score: ________

Course & Year Level: ________________________ Date: __________

Guide Questions
1. Who is Emilio Aguinaldo? How did he end up as the
leader of the revolution?
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 60

2. According to the declaration, how did the Spanish colonization begin?

__________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________

3. Who were the inspirations of the revolution?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

4. What role did the Americans play in the narrative?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

5. Considering the American and Japanese occupation as well as the current state of the
Philippines, how important is the 1989 Declaration of Independence?

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 61

“Corazon Aquino, President Corazon Aquino’s Speech before the U.S. Congress
Sept. 18, 1986 [Speech]”

Learning outcome
At the end of the lesson you should able to:
1. Discuss the context and perspective of the document
2. Explain how the Philippines achieved its independence from
Spanish colonial rule.
3. Examine the state of Philippine independence today
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

62
 GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
63
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 64
Relevance:

Through this would be one of many speeches that Cory Aquino would
deliver as President of the Philippines, it was this speech that gave credence to the
People Power Revolution not only to the Americans but to the world – that change
was possible through peaceful means. When she finished her speech, Senate
Majority Leader Robert Dole said Mrs. Aquino, “Cory, you hit a home run” . Aquino
smiled back and said, “I hope the bases were loaded “. Five hours

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 65

later, the House of Representative voted, 203 to 197, in favor of $200 million as
emergency aid for Philippines.
References:

Aquino C. (1986). “Restoring Democracy by the Ways of Democracy.” In

http://www.coryaquino.ph/index.php/works/article/353b89aa-f2dc-11df-b3cf
001617d76479.retrieved 31 August 2020

Torres, J.V (2018), Batis: Source in the Philippine History’. C&E publishing, Quezon City

Assessment # ______

Name: __________________________________ Score: ________

Course & Year Level: ________________________ Date: __________

Guide Questions
1. Discuss the context the speech was delivered.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
2. Watch the speech of Cory Aquino. Describe the scne. How was the speech? How did the
audience react to her half-hour-long address?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
3. What was in her speech that convince the House of Representative to grant $200 million
dollar emergency aid to Philippines? What were the issues raied or views pointed out in
her address?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
4. How did the speech affect you as a viewer? In what way would it be rendered relevant to
the current condition of our country? Cite specific lines from the speech.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
5. What are the points in her speech that you agree and disagree with? Which line hit home?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 66

“FILIPINO GRIEVANCES AGAINST GENERAL WOOD”

This section focuses on the grievances of Filipinos against the governance of Governor Wood. The
discontent of the Filipinos under the rule of Governor Wood led to the Cabinet Crisis of 1923. This section
 also highlights hoe these grievances reflected the nature of the American colonial government.

Learning outcome: At the end of this section, the students are expected to:

1. Identify the points that comprise the grievances of Filipinos against governor Wood; 2.
Explain the importance of the Grievances against Governor Wood to the grand narrative of
Philippines history; and
3. Explain the relevance of Grievances against the Governor Wood to the present time

About the Governor-General

Gov. Gen. Leonard Wood was born on October 9, 1860. He was a

graduate of Harvard Medical School and was later conscripted to
the U.S. Army as a medical doctor. He was awarded the Medal of
Honor for his service on the expedition against Apache Indians in
1886. During the Spanish American War of 1898, he saw action in
Cuba which gave him the position of Brigadier-General at the end
of the campaign and which he became military governor in Cuba
from 1899 to 1902. In 1903, he became military governor in
Mindanao. He commanded the Philippine Division of the U.S. Army
from 1906-1908. He went to the US and became Chief of Staff from
1910-1914. In 1920, he became a Republican candidate for the
presidency but lost in the nomination to Warren Harding. In 1921,
Harding won the election, and in acknowledgment of his worthy contender, Harding sent
him and former governor-general Cameron Forbes for a mission in the Philippines, as
Harding appointed him later as governor-general (Britannica, 2018).
Filipino Grievances Against Governor Wood
Extract from Commission on Independence “Filipino Grievances Against Governor Wood ,” in Zaide, Gregorio and Zaide,
Sonia, eds. Documentary Sources of Philippine History Vol. 11, Document 608, Copyright © 1990, pp. 230-234, Reprinted
with permission by Dr. Sonia Zaide.(Approved by the Commission on Independence on November 17, 1926)

More than a quarter of a century has elapsed since the Philippines came under the
American flag—an emblem of freedom, not of subjugation; a symbol of altruism, not of
selfishness or greed. American sovereignty was implanted in our country with the
avowed purpose of training us in the art or self-government and granting us
independence. Our good, not her gain was to be America’s aim. Our country was
committed to her in trust to be conserved and developed for the benefit of our people.
Believing in the sincerity of America’s purpose, the Filipinos applied themselves with
patient diligence to the task of meeting the conditions exacted of them, anxiously
awaiting the day when America would honour her promise.
The first 20 years of civil government were marked by mutual understanding and
loyal cooperation between American and Filipinos. At the end of that period, when it
seemed that the goal had finally been reached, after the President of the United States
had advised the Congress that the time had come for America to fulfil her sacred
pledge, Major-General Leonard Wood was sent to the Philippines as Governor-General.
Cognizant of the part taken by General Wood in the liberation of Cuba, the Filipino
people expected that under his administration the spirit of cooperation would be
maintained and that the work of political emancipation would be complete. Contrary,

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 67

however, to our expectations, his conduct of the government has been characterized by
a train of usurpations and arbitrary acts, resulting in the curtailment of our autonomy, the
destruction of our constitutional system, and the reversal of America’s Philippine policy.
This line of conduct recently culminated in the issuance of Executive Order No. 37, by
which he has attempted to nullify laws creating the Board of Control and assumed the
functions of that body. The gravity of this last step is the more evident when we recall the
series of usurpations theretofore committed by him.
He has refused his assent to laws which were the most wholesome and necessary for
the public good.
He has set at naught both the legal authority and responsibility for the Philippines
heads of departments.
He has substituted his constitutional advisers for a group of military attachés without
legal standing in the government and not responsible to the people.
He has reversed the policy of Filipinizing the service of the government by appointing
Americans even when Filipinos of proven capacity were available.
He has obstructed the carrying out of national economic policies duly adopted by
the Legislature, merely because they are in conflict with his personal views. He has
rendered merely perfunctory the power of the Legislature to pass the annual
appropriation law by reviving items in the law of the preceding year, after vetoing the
corresponding items of the current appropriation act, in flagrant violation of the Organic
Law.
He has made appointments to positions and authorized the payment of salaries
therefore after having vetoed the appropriations for such salaries.
He has used certain public funds to grant additional compensation to public officials
in clear violation of law.
He has arrogated unto himself the right of exercising the powers granted by law to the
Emergency Board after abolishing said board on the ground that its powers involved an
unlawful delegation of legislative authority.
He has unduly interfered in the administration of justice.
He has refused to obtain the advice of the Senate in making appointments where
such advice is required by the Organic Act.
He has refused to submit to the Senate appointment for vacancies occurring during
the recess of the Legislature in the contravention of the Organic Act.
He has continued in office nominees whose appointments had been rejected by the
Senate.
He has usurped legislative powers by imposing conditions on legislative measures
approved by him.
He has, in the administration of affairs in Mindanao, brought about a condition which
has given rise to discord and dissension between certain groups of Christian and
Mohammedan Filipinos.
He has by his policies created strained relations between resident Americans and
Filipinos.
He has endeavoured, on the pretext of getting the government out of business, to
dispose of all the companies capitalized by the government worth many millions of the
people’s money to powerful Americans interests.
He has sanctioned the campaign of insidious propaganda in the United States against
the Filipino people and their aspirations.
He has attempted to close the Philippine National Bank so necessary to the economic
development of the country.
He has adopted the practice of intervening in, and controlling directly, to its minute
details, the affairs of the Philippine Government, both insular and local, in violation of self
government.
He has insistently sought the amendment of our land laws approved by the Congress
of the United States, which amendment would open up the resources of our country to
exploitation by predatory interests.

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 68

 Not content with these and other arbitrary acts, the Governor-General has recently
promulgated Executive Order No. 37, declaring that the laws creating and defining the
powers of the Board of Control which is authorized to vote the stocks owned by the
government in certain private corporations, are absolute nullities. In the same order the
Governor-General also announced his purpose to exercise solely and by himself the
powers and duties developing upon the said board. This executive order is purported to
be based on an opinion rendered by the Judge Advocate General of the United States
Army and the confirmatory opinions of the Acting Advocate General on November 7.
Despite this fact, he has found it convenient to withhold the publication of his order until
November 10, a few hours after the Legislature had adjourned, thus depriving the
Legislature of the opportunity to consider the matter.
The laws creating and defining the powers of the Board of Control have been in
force and acted upon by the present Governor-General and other officers of the
government for a number of years, and they have neither been repealed by the
Legislature, annulled by Congress, the Governor-General by a mere executive order
can set them aside, is to subvert the whole system of constitutional government and
destroy the theory of separation of powers which the Governor-General has always
been so intent in upholding.
In the face of this critical situation, we, the constitutional representatives of the
Filipino people, met to deliberate upon the present difficulties existing in the
Government of the Philippines Islands and to determine how best to preserve the
supremacy and majesty of the laws and to safeguard the rights and liberties of our
people, having faith in the sense of justice of the people of the United States and
inspired by her patriotic example in the early days of her history, do hereby, in our
behalf and in the name of the F ilipino people, solemnly and publicly make known our
most vigorous protest against the arbitrary acts
and usurpations of the present Governor-General of the Philippine Islands, particularly
against Executive Order No. 37.
The consciousness of our sacred and inescapable duty to our country and our sense of
loyalty to the people of acts of the present Governor-General as arbitrary, oppressive
and undemocratic. We appeal to the judgement and conscience of the American
people in justification of our stand and for the vindication of our rights.

Commission on Independence, Filipino Grievances Against General Wood (Zaide 1990, vol. 11, pp.
230-234). [Petition Letter]

Exercise # ______

Name: __________________________________ Score: ________

Course & Year Level: _____________________ Date: __________

I - Complete the matrix below by going through the readings above and picking out some of the
complaints of Filipino politicians against Governor General Wood
Complaints against him as Gov. Gen. Wood’s Efforts His Intentions
lifted from the document
 GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 69

II – Comparing the kind of politics that we have today.

Bad politics of Filipinos during the Bad politics of Filipinos until
American Period today

(Percival, 2018)

III - Give three reasons why a Filipino grievance against Governor Wood is important
to the grand narrative of the Philippine history.

1. ________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

2. ________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

3. ________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
 ________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 70

“ONE PAST BUT MAY HISTORIES”: CONTROVERSIES AND

CONFLICTING VIEWS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

There is more to just reading history. There is also the task of studying historical
accounts. Much of our history is written because there are accounts of eyewitness or
participants of specific events. And this is where the problem comes in which account
should we believed?

As the saying in historical studies goes, “there is one past but many histories.” Thus,
controversies on and conflicting views of events in Philippine history exist. This
situation, however, does not detract from any form of historical study, rather it
contributes to the scholarship or study, and rather it contributes to the scholarship or
study of historical sources by analyzing how perspectives are made on Historical events

“SITE OF THE FIRST MASS”

The Board of Commissioners of the National Historical Commission of the

Philippines (NHCP) signed on 15 July 2020 Resolution No. 2, adopting the report
submitted by the panel that reviewed the issue surrounding the site of the 1521
Easter Sunday Mass in the Philippines. In the report (see below), the panel
recommended Limasawa, in today’s Southern Leyte, as the site of the said event.

The panel was convened in response to the requests from various institutions, including
the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), even as the anticipation of
the Filipino Catholic faithful had just begun for the 500th anniversary of the introduction
of Christianity in the Philippines (see attached brief background about the process).

Republic Act No. 10086 or Strengthening People’s Nationalism Act of 2009 mandates
the NHCP to “actively engage in the settlement or resolution of controversies or issues
relative to historical personages, places, dates and events.”
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

72

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

73
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 74
Church Support

The issue of the exact location of the historic Mass was earlier resolved by the NHI, the
forerunner of NHCP, through two panel of expert; the first led by former Supreme
Justice Emilio Gancayco in 1995 and second by historian Benito Legarda in 2008. Both
panels ruled that the site of the 1521 Ester Sunday Mass was Limawasa Island.

The panel reassessed the studies and literature on the matter, gathered the exact copies
of Antonio Pigafetta’s chronicles and other account abroad, surveyed the presumed
sites of the event in Butuan and Limasawa , consulted expert in geology and
cartography, and submitted its report for review by the history departments of various
Philippine universities.

Reference
http://www.google.com.ph/amp/s/newsinfo.inquirer.net/1325039/limasawa-not-butuan
affirmed-as-site-of-first-mass-in-ph/amp

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 75

 Referen
ce: https://nhcp.gov.ph/official-position-of-the-national-historical-commission-of-the philippines-on-the-site-of-the-
1521-easter-sunday-mass
2/?fbclid=IwAR0mppGGLBxoK2tlkm7mqPn9jZgYy2rl5WEWvW99YrGGOKlSZD-NJ_3PPjQQ

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History 76 Assessment # ______

Name: __________________________________ Score: ________ Course & Year

Level: ________________________ Date: __________

Guide questions:
1. Why Limasawa is the first mass?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________ 2.
When was the first Mass in the Philippines?
________________________________________________________________________
 ________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. What are the issues concerning the first Mass held in the Philippines?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________ 4.
Is Mazaua and Limasawa the same?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. What is the significance of this controversy in this contemporary time?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

77
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History
GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

79

GEC03 Readings in Philippine History

80