WEEK 1:

Historiography and Its Importance

The term historiography is the craft of writing history. It is the art of historical writing and
communicating in writing what the historian thinks he knows about the past. Thus, when we
speak of Chinese historiography, we refer to all or at least the known written histories of China's
people. Nigerian historiography refers to the available historical works in Nigeria. In another
aspect, historiography is preoccupied with other men's interpretation of history; it is studying
other people's understanding of the historical process and the historian's craft. The historian's
task is the trend of past events and the historian's craft through the historical process.

Simply put, his/her task is the discovery of what happened in the past. Historiography does
not deal with specific histories; history does not seek to discover what happened in the past nor
account for past actions. However, it looks into what others have said about history and how they
have interpreted the past. Therefore, historiography traces the trend of historical thought in
specific localities and the world at large.

History and historiography as intertwined concepts

Historiography is the subject matter of history. In other words, without the study of the past
called history, historiography would not exist. Thus, historiography is derived from history,
thereby showing its importance. In the next portion of this study session, we shall examine the
justifications for history as an academic discipline and a worthwhile pursuit.

Importance of History

● Knowledge of Society. History provides societies with knowledge about themselves. A

society can know itself only by acquiring knowledge of its history. Society must know
itself and understand its relationship with the past, other societies, and other cultures.
History meets this need; it makes people aware of the character of their own time by
providing them with information about their past that they can study and compare with
other peoples' experiences.
● Used in problem-solving. History is useful in meeting new situations and solving the
present's problems because a full understanding of human behavior in the past allows
us to solve present issues intelligently.
● A bridge of all disciplines. As a mediating discipline, history is also useful because
everything has a history. Medicine, banking, legal practice, teaching religion,
commerce, etc., have history. Thus, history, as a discipline, covers a wide range of
issues. A nurse would find a knowledge of the history of nursing in her locality useful,
while military personnel can also find the history of the force invaluable. Therefore,
history becomes a meeting ground for different disciplines, thereby making it
fascinating.

Why Study History?

 According to Peter Stearns (1998), we should study history because it is essential to
individuals and society and harbors beauty. We can discuss the subject's real functions in many
ways because of different historical talents and paths to historical meaning. All definitions of
history's utility, however, rely on two fundamental facts.

1. History Helps Us Understand People and Societies

In the first place, history offers a storehouse of information about how people and societies
behave. Understanding the operations of people and communities is difficult, although several
disciplines attempt it. Exclusive reliance on current data would needlessly handicap our efforts.
How can we evaluate war if the nation is at peace other than using historical materials? How can
we understand genius, the influence of technological innovation, or the role that beliefs play in
shaping family life if we do not use what we know about past experiences? Several social
scientists attempt to formulate laws or theories about human behavior. However, even these
recourses depend on historical information, except for limited artificial cases in which scientists
can do experiments to determine how people act under certain circumstances. Significant aspects
of a society's operation, such as mass elections, missionary activities, or military alliances,
cannot be set up as precise experiments.

Consequently, history must serve, however imperfectly, as a replacement for experiments.

Data from the past must serve as our most vital evidence in determining why our society behaves
within our current setting. History offers the only extensive evidential base for the contemplation
and analysis of how societies function. People also need to have some sense of how societies
work simply to run their own lives.

2. History Helps Us Understand Change and How the Society We Live in Came to Be

The second reason why history is inescapable as a subject of serious study follows the first
one closely. The past causes the present and the future. Any time we want to know why
something happened, that is, whether a shift in political party dominance in the American
Congress, a significant change in the teenage suicide rate, or a war in the Balkans or the Middle
East, we have to look for factors that took shape earlier. Occasionally, recent history will explain a
significant development, but often we need to look further back to identify the causes of change.
Only through studying history do we grasp how things change and begin comprehending the
factors that cause these changes and understand what elements of an institution or a society
persist despite change.

3. Importance of History in Our Own Lives

The two fundamental reasons for studying history underlie specific and relatively diverse
uses of history in our own lives. A well-told history is beautiful. Many of the historians who most
appeal to the general reading public know the importance of dramatic and skillful writing and
accuracy. Biography and military history appeal in part because of the tales they contain. History
as art and entertainment serves a real purpose on aesthetic grounds and the level of human
understanding. Well-told stories reveal how people and societies have functioned and prompt
thoughts about the human experience in other times and places. The same aesthetic and
humanistic goals inspire people to immerse themselves in reconstructing relatively remote pasts,
far removed from the immediate, present-day utility. Exploring what historians occasionally call
the "pastness of the past," that is, how people in distant ages constructed their lives, involves a
sense of beauty and excitement and ultimately another perspective on human life and society.

4. History Contributes to Moral Understanding

 History also provides a terrain for moral contemplation. Studying the stories of individuals
and situations in the past allows a history student to test their moral sense and hone it against
some real complexities that individuals have faced in challenging settings. People who have
weathered adversity not only in works of fiction but in historical circumstances can inspire.
"History is teaching by example" describes this use of a study of the past, that is, a study of
certifiable heroes (i.e., the great men and women of history) who successfully worked through
moral dilemmas and ordinary people who provide lessons in courage, diligence, or constructive
protest.

5. History Provides Identity

History also helps provide identity, which is one reason all modern nations encourage its
teaching in some form. Historical data includes how families, groups, institutions, and whole
countries were formed and how they have evolved while retaining cohesion. For many Americans,
studying one's family history is the most obvious use of history because it provides facts about
genealogy and (at a slightly more complex level) a basis for understanding how the family has
interacted with considerable historical change. Family identity is established and confirmed. Many
institutions, businesses, communities, and social units, such as ethnic groups in the United
States, use history for similar identity purposes. Defining the group in the present pales compared
with the possibility of forming an identity based on a rich past. Nations also use identity history
and abuse it occasionally. Narratives that tell the national story, emphasizing distinctive features
of the national experience, are meant to provide an understanding of national values and a
commitment to national loyalty.

6. Studying History Is Essential for Good Citizenship

A study of history is essential for good citizenship. The need for good citizenship is the most
common justification for history in the school curricula. The advocates of citizenship history also
hope to promote national identity and loyalty through a history spiced by vivid stories and
lessons in individual success and morality. However, the importance of history for citizenship
goes beyond this narrow goal and can even challenge it at some points.

The history that lays the foundation for genuine citizenship returns to the essential uses of
the study of the past. History provides data about the emergence of national institutions,
problems, and values because it is the only significant storehouse of such data. History also
offers evidence about how nations have interacted with other societies, providing international
and comparative perspectives essential for responsible citizenship. Studying history also helps
us understand how recent, current, and prospective changes that affect citizens' lives are
emerging or may emerge and what causes are involved. Studying history also encourages habits
of mind that are vital for responsible public behavior, whether as a national or community leader,
an informed voter, a petitioner, or a superficial observer.

What Skills Does a Student of History Develop?

What does a well-trained student of history, schooled to work on past materials and case
studies in social change, learn how to do? The list is manageable, but it contains several
overlapping categories.

Ability to Assess Evidence. The study of history builds experience in dealing with and
assessing various types of evidence, that is, the kind of evidence historians use in shaping the
most accurate pictures of the past that they can. Learning how to interpret past political leaders'
statements helps form the capacity to distinguish between the objective and the self-serving
among statements made by present-day political leaders. Learning how to combine different kinds
of evidence, such as public statements, private records, numerical data, and visual materials,
develops the ability to make coherent arguments based on various data. This skill can also be
applied to information that is encountered in our everyday life.

Ability to Assess Conflicting Interpretations. Learning history means gaining skill in sorting
through diverse, often conflicting interpretations. Understanding how societies work, which is the
central goal of studying history, is inherently imprecise. The same is also correct for
understanding what is going on in the present day. Learning how to identify and evaluate
conflicting interpretations is an essential citizenship skill for which history, as an often-contested
laboratory of human experience, provides training. Studying different historical interpretations is
one area in which the full benefits of historical study occasionally clash with the simplistic
analysis of the past to construct identity. Experience in examining past situations provides a
constructively critical sense applicable to partisan claims about the glories of national or group
identity. The study of history for no reason undermines loyalty or commitment, but it teaches the
need for assessing arguments and provides opportunities to engage in debate and achieve
perspective.

Experience in Assessing Past Examples of Change. Experience in assessing past examples of

change is vital to understand the difference in society today; it is an essential skill in our
"ever-changing world." The analysis of change means developing some capacity for determining
the magnitude and significance of change because some changes are more fundamental than
others. Comparing specific changes to relevant examples from the past helps history students
develop this capacity. The ability to identify the continuities that always accompany even the most
dramatic changes also comes from studying history, similar to the skill to determine the probable
causes of change. Learning history helps one determine if one main factor, such as a
technological innovation or a deliberate new policy, accounts for a change or whether because
generally, several factors combine to generate the actual change that occurs.

Hence, the study of history is crucial to developing a well-informed citizen. It provides

necessary factual information about our political institutions' background and about the values
and problems that affect our social well-being. It also contributes to our capacity to use evidence,
assess interpretations, and analyze change and continuities. No one can ever deal with the
present as the historian deals with the past—we lack the perspective for this feat, but we can
move in this direction by applying historical habits, and we will function as good citizens in the
process.

History Is Useful in the World of Work

History is useful for work. Its study helps create exemplary businesspeople, professionals,
and political leaders. The number of explicit professional jobs for historians is considerable, but
most people who study history do not become professional historians. Professional historians
teach at various levels, work in museums and media centers, do historical research for
businesses or public agencies, or participate in the growing number of historical consultancies.
These categories are essential to keep the necessary enterprise of history going, but most people
who study history use their training for various professional purposes. History students find their
experience directly relevant to jobs in multiple careers and studying law and public
administration. Employers often deliberately seek students with the kinds of capacities historical
study promotes. The reasons are not hard to identify; history students acquire a broad
perspective that gives them the range and flexibility required in many work situations by studying
different phases of the past and various societies in the past. These students develop research
skills, the ability to find and evaluate sources of information, and the means to identify and
evaluate diverse interpretations. Work in history also improves basic writing and speaking skills.
It is directly relevant to many analytical requirements in public and private sectors, where the
capacity to identify, assess, and explain trends is essential. Historical study is an asset for
various work and professional situations.

Still, historical study generally does not directly lead to a particular job slot as the students of
some technical fields do. However, history particularly prepares students for the long haul in their
careers, its qualities helping adaptation and advancement beyond entry-level employment. In our
society, many people who are drawn to historical study worry about its relevance. In our changing
economy, people are concerned about future job opportunities in most fields. However, historical
training is not an indulgence; it applies directly to many careers and can help us in our working
lives.

Why study history? The answer is because we must gain access to the laboratory of human
experience. When we study history reasonably well and acquire some usable habits of mind and
some necessary data about the forces that affect our lives, we emerge as people with relevant
skills and an enhanced capacity for informed citizenship, critical thinking, and simple awareness.
The uses of history are varied. Studying history can develop several "salable" skills but must not
be pinned down to the narrowest utilitarianism. Some history that is confined to personal
recollections about changes and continuities in the immediate environment is essential to
function beyond childhood. Some history depends on personal taste, where one finds beauty, the
joy of discovery, or intellectual challenge.

FOUNDATION OF DATA

Primary Source(s)

● It is a document created during the time of your research subject about your research
subject. These documents are directly connected with the events or people being
researched (Concordia University Texas Library, 2020).
● It contains original information that is not derived from interpretation, summarizing, or
analyzing someone else's work (Eastern Institute of Technology, nd).
● These are firsthand accounts created when a historical event occurred or are records
of original ideas. It consists of information that has not been analyzed, commented on,
or interpreted. It can be biased, depending on the viewpoint of the author. These
sources are valuable because they give an exact account of historical events or new
ideas (Westminster Giovale Library, nd)
● These sources are original or new materials, such as an activist giving a speech, a
scientist conducting original research, a student drawing original conclusions from
others' works, an artist creating a piece of artwork, or your grandmother writing an
autobiography. Primary sources are firsthand and not interpreted by anyone else; they
offer a personal point of view and are created by witnesses of, or participants in, an
event (except in cases of historical research written after the fact). Researchers also
create primary sources (Saint Mary's University of Minnesota, 2013).

Example of primary sources:

 ● Autobiographies and memoirs
● Books, articles, or news stories written at the time of the event
● Diaries and journals
● Data and original research
● Speeches and interviews
● Letters and memos
● Government documents from that period
● Census statistics
● Organizational records from that period
● Documentaries that rely on primary source materials
● Photographs
● Art (from a period)
● Maps (from a period)
● Personal narratives
● Internet communications (including listservs and emails)
● Any of the above reprinted in the original format and language

Questions to Ask When Determining If Something is a Primary Source:

● Was the author the first to create this research?

● Is the information uninterpreted data or statistics?
● Is the source an original work?
● Did the information come from personal experience?

Why Use Primary Sources?

Sources that present new research, original conclusions based on the data, or an author's
actual perspective are useful for your needs. The use of these resources allows one to interpret
the information instead of relying on the interpretations of others, which s is why your instructors
may require you to find original research for your assignments.

Note: Given that primary sources reflect the true meanings and ideas introduced by authors, the
information itself may not be completely objective, well-reasoned, or accurate.

Secondary Source(s)

● It is a document created at a much later than the period of the event being researched
by someone who did not experience the said event. These documents have no direct
personal connection with the events or people being studied, but they may benefit
from being able to put the event "in context" or perspective (Concordia University
Texas Library, 2020).
 ● These works have been based on primary or secondary sources. These sources are
generally an interpretation, a summary, an analysis, or a review (Eastern Institute of
Technology, nd).
● It offers commentary, analysis, or interpretation of the primary sources. These sources
are written many years after an event or by people that are not directly involved in the
event. These sources are often written by people who have expertise in the field and
can be biased, depending on the author's viewpoint (Westminster Giovale Library, nd).
● These sources interpret, include, describe, or draw conclusions based on works
written by others. Authors use secondary sources to present evidence, back up
arguments and statements, or represent an opinion using and citing multiple sources.
Secondary sources are often referred to as "one step removed" from the actual
occurrence or fact (Saint Mary's University of Minnesota, 2013).

Example of secondary sources:

● Encyclopedias
● Chronologies
● Biographies
● Monographs (a specialized book or article)
● Most journal articles (unless written at the time of the event)
● Most published books (unless written at the time of the event)
● Abstracts of articles
● Paraphrased quotations
● Dictionaries
● Textbooks
● Webpages
● Documentary movies
● Analysis of a clinical trial
● Commentaries
● Literature reviews and meta-analyses

Questions to Ask When Determining If Something Is a Secondary Source:

● Did the author consult multiple sources to create this work?

● Is this information an interpretation or paraphrasing of another author's work?
● Did the information come from second-hand reporting?
● Is the source a textbook, review, or commentary?

Why Use Secondary Sources?

 Secondary sources are best for uncovering the background or historical information about a
topic and broadening your understanding of a subject by exposing you to others' perspectives,
interpretations, and conclusions. However, critiquing an original information source (primary
source) is a better option if you plan to reference it in your work.

WEEK 2:
THE PHILIPPINES as an archipelago

As an archipelago nation, the Philippines has more than 7,100 islands with a coastline that
stretches 10,850 miles. The archipelago has no land boundaries. Taiwan is the nearest country to
the north, Brunei, and Malaysia to the southwest, Indonesia to the south, Vietnam to the west, and
China to the northwest. The South China Sea surrounds the Philippines in the west, the Pacific
Ocean in the east, the Sulu and Celebes Seas in the south, and the Bashi Channel in the north.
These tropical and mountainous islands have a land area of 115,831 square miles. Also, the
country comprises three major regions: Luzon, the largest island in the north; the Visayas, which
is an island group in the center; and Mindanao, which is the largest island in the south. These
regions have distinct political, social, and cultural differences. The capital city of the country is
Manila in Luzon, where the climate is always tropical and warm because the Philippines is 5° to
20° north of the equator. The Philippines is a part of the Southeast Asian nations. Its neighboring
countries are Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, Brunei, East Timor, Cambodia,
Laos, and Myanmar. It has a strategic location and is open to diverse cultural influences coming
from Asia and beyond. Filipinos are primarily Malay people. Additionally, the archipelago lies on
the edge of the so-called Ring of Fire, a chain of active volcanoes marking the intersection of two
tectonic plates. The presence of the Ring of Fire makes the possibility of an earthquake or
volcanic eruption an ever-present danger and the islands are originally volcanic and primarily
mountainous. It has been said that the highest point in the country is the peak of Mount Apo in
Mindanao, which is 9,692 feet above sea level, followed by Mount Pulag in Luzon, which is 9,324
feet above sea level. The worst recorded calamity in the Philippines occurred in June 1991 when
Mount Pinatubo in central Luzon blew up, thereby causing widespread devastation.

The archipelago is geologically a part of the Philippine Mobile Belt, situated between the
Philippine Sea Plate, the South China Sea Basin of the Eurasian Plate, and the Sundra Plate. The
Mindanao Trench (also known as the Philippine Trench) is an 820-mile submarine trench found in
the east of the Philippine Mobile Belt and a part of a collision of tectonic plates. The Galathea
Depth, which is the deepest point in the Philippines Sea Plate, has 34,580 feet. The Philippine
Fault System comprises a network of seismic faults that produce several earthquakes each year,
most of which are undetectable.
 The Philippines is located within many of Southeast Asia’s main bodies of water, such as the
South China Sea, Philippine Sea, Sulu Sea, Celebes Sea, and Luzon Strait. The coastlines of many
islands are irregular, with numerous bays, gulfs, and inlets. Manila Bay is the most commercially
important coastline because of its naturally sheltered harbor. The largest gulfs, Leyte and Panay
gulfs, are in located the Visayan Islands. The Philippines’ large rivers are generally not navigable,
except for short portions. Streams are subject to typhoons and flooding during the monsoon
season. The longest river is the Cagayan River in north-central Luzon, which flows northward to
the sea. Other long rivers in Luzon are Agno and Pampanga rivers, which cross the central Luzon
Valley. Chico River flows through the Cordillera Central in northern Luzon and irrigates the
mountainsides. Pasig River, one of Luzon’s shortest rivers, flows through Manila, thereby giving it
commercial significance. It originates in the island’s largest lake, Laguna de Bay, and empties into
Manila Bay. Mindanao has two main rivers. The Mindanao River (Rio Grande de Mindanao)
receives the waters of Pulangi River. Agusan Rivers flows north into the Bohol Sea. The largest
lake in the Philippines is Laguna de Bay, a freshwater lake located 13 kilometers (8 miles)
southeast of Manila. Its surface area is 922 square kilometers (356 square miles). Sewage and
toxic waste from the surrounding urban areas contaminate its water. Taal Lake, 56 kilometers (35
miles) south of Manila, occupies a vast volcanic crater and contains an active volcano. Lake
Lanao is the largest lake in Mindanao and the source of the Agusan River, which exits the lake at
the Maria Christina Falls. Lake Lanao is 347 square kilometers (134 square miles) in area.

Controversial Territory

The Philippines’ territorial sea claims extend 100 nautical miles off the coastline all around
the country under the 1898 Treaty of Paris. A 1978 presidential decree increased the share to 285
nautical miles into the South China Sea, encompassing the disputed Spratly Islands, known as the
Kalayaan (Freedom) Islands in the Philippines. The United States indicates that the claim is
excessive, thereby violating the international freedom of navigation. However, the Philippines also
claims sovereignty over its continental shelf, extending 200 nautical miles from its coastline,
under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, China, Malaysia, Taiwan,
and Vietnam make similar claims. The islands at stake are those with underwater oil and natural
gas resources. The 2002 Declaration on the Behavior of Parties in the South China Sea helped
de-escalate tensions in the Spratly Islands, but it did not establish a legal code of conduct. In
2005, China’s, the Philippines’, and Vietnam’s national oil corporations inked a collaborative
agreement to conduct maritime seismic research in the Spratly Islands.

The same claim was placed on the Malaysia’s Sabah state. The Sultanate of Brunei granted
this region to the Sultanate of Sulu as a reward for assisting him against his enemies. In 1878, the
Sultanate of Sulu leased Sabah to the British North Borneo Company for 5,000 Malaysian ringgits
per year and firearms to fight the Spaniards. Sabah became a British crown colony in 1920. Sabah
was formally handed to Malaysia by the British in 1963. Violent mass deportations of Filipinos
living in Sabah sparked debate about the assertion in 2003. Malaysia still pays the annual rent of
5,000 Malaysian ringgits (approximately US$1,500) to the Sultan of Sulu’s heirs.

Topography

The Philippines lies between Taiwan and Borneo in the Pacific Ocean and the South China
Sea. Nearly 3,000 islands out of the more than 7,000 islands in the Philippines are named. The 11
largest islands account for more than 90% of the total land area. More than 70% of the population
resides on the two largest islands, that is, Luzon and Mindanao, which together comprise more
than 70% of the land area.

Luzon, which is the largest island, has an area of 104,690 square kilometers (40,421 square
miles). Three parallel mountain ranges run from north to south in Luzon. The longest range, which
is the Sierra Madre, is on the east coast. The Cagayan River Valley, which separates the Sierra
Madre from the western Cordillera Central range, is on the west coast. Mountainside rice terraces
create deep steps into the slope of the Cordillera Central, which is more than 6 meters (20 feet)
high. Luzon’s highest peak, that is, Mount Pulag, is 2,930 meters (9,613 feet) high. The Zambales
Mountains are in the westernmost part of Luzon and ends at Manila Bay. The southern end of the
island, which is called the Bicol Peninsula, is mountainous and has many volcanoes.
Southeastern Luzon has the low-lying Ragay Hills and a 91-meter (299-foot) deep river gorge.
Luzon has two lowland areas, that is, the Central Plain and the Cagayan Valley. Central Plain is the
largest at 240 kilometers (149 miles) long and 64 kilometers (40 miles) wide. The plain has many
swamps because it is only slightly above sea level. Cagayan Valley has an area of 10,360 square
kilometers (4,000 square miles). Mindoro is the island to the southwest of Luzon; its land area is
9,736 square kilometers (3,759 square miles). A mountain range runs from north to south across
the island with coastal plains on either side. The highest peak, that is, Mount Halcon, is 2,587
meters (8,488 feet) high. As the largest island, it is composed of six main regions, namely, the
National Capital Region, Cordillera Administrative Region, Ilocos (Region 1), Cagayan Valley
(Region 2), Central Luzon (Region 3), Southern Tagalog (Region 4), and Bicol (Region 5).

The Visayan island group includes more than half the Philippine islands. Seven of these
islands are populated. The group has a total land area of 61,077 square kilometers (23,582 square
miles). The major islands are Samar (13,079 square kilometers), Negros (12,703 square
kilometers), Panay (11,515 square kilometers), Leyte (7,213 square kilometers), Cebu (4,421 square
kilometers), Bohol (3,865 square kilometers), and Masbate (3,268 square kilometers). The
easternmost islands of Samar and Leyte are connected by a bridge. Samar and Leyte have dense
jungle forests, and each has a central mountain range. Southern Samar has rocky hills. Chocolate
Hills, which is cone-shaped mounds covering 52 square kilometers (20 square miles), is located
southwest in Bohol. Chocolate Hills range from 50 meters to 200 meters (164–656 feet) high and
are covered in vegetation that turns brown during summer. The rest of the island consists of
plateaus. To the west is Cebu, which is a long, narrow island with a hilly interior. Negros, which is
the island to the west of Cebu, is primarily lowlands. The volcanic rock Tablas Plateau is located
in the southwest. Negros has one high volcanic mountain range. Panay is the westernmost island
in the system; it has a hilly western coast and northern lowlands. Masbate is located in the north
of Visayas and has hilly areas. Palawan is a part of the Calamian Islands in the eastern
Philippines. The total land area of Palawan is 11,655 square kilometers (4,500 square miles), 8–48
kilometers (5 to 30 miles) wide, and more than 442 kilometers (275 miles) long. Mountains run the
entire length of the island, surrounded by a narrow coastline. The highest peak is 2,085 meters
(6,841 feet) high. The major region comprises three main regions, namely, western (region 6),
central (region 7), and eastern Visayas (region 8).

Mindanao, which is the country’s second largest island, has a total land area of 94,630 square
kilometers (36,537 square miles). The Pacific Cordillera range lies on the island’s eastern coast.
Agusan River separates itself from the Cordillera central range to the west. Mount Apo in the
central mountain system is the highest elevation in the country at 2,804 meters high (9,199 feet).
The two ranges end in the Bukidnon-Lanao Plateau, which has several deep canyons and extinct
volcanoes. The plateau has an elevation of 609 meters (1,998 feet). The Davao-Agusan Trough is a
lowland area in the east that becomes flooded seasonally. South-central Mindanao has two
marshes. Western Mindanao, which is a mountainous area, is called the Zamboanga Peninsula.
The Sulu Archipelago is southwest between the Zamboanga Peninsula and Indonesia. It
comprises more than 800 small islands with a total area of approximately 4,144 square kilometers
(1,600 square miles). Mindanao consists of the following regions: western Mindanao (region 9),
northern Mindanao (region 10), southern Mindanao (region 11), central Mindanao (region 12), and
Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.

Climate and Environment

As a tropical climate country, the Philippines remains hot and humid throughout the year. The
monsoons blow from the southwest from May to October and from the northeast from November
to February. The western part of the country has two seasons. One is summer, which is the rainy
season, and begins in May and ends in November. And the other is winter, which is the dry season
in most of the Philippines, and starts in December and ends in May. December through February
is cool and dry, but March through May is hot and dry. The tropical storm season lasts from June
to October, with most of the storms coming from the southeast. Unfortunately, typhoons annually
lash out in the islands, especially those closest to the Pacific. Even a weak typhoon can now
cause flash flooding and tragic loss of human life and property because of deforestation.

An example is what happened when Typhoon Uring hit Ormoc, Leyte, on November 5, 1991.
The land of the Philippines is characterized by irregular coasts, alluvial plains, narrow valleys, and
rolling hills and mountains running from north to south. It used to have a lush and tropical forest
cover with a diverse ecosystem. However, deforestation reduced forests to only 19.4% by the end
of the 20th century. Deforestation occurs when lumber companies cut down all forests in a given
area without replanting trees, although they are required by law to do so at present.

Specifically, the two distinct seasons in the country are wet and dry. The wet season is
generally the time for rice planting. The population as of the 2000 census is 76.5 million and is
concentrated in 12 major islands, which constitute 95% of the available land space. This value
represents an increase of 11.5% or 7.9 million over the 1995 census count of 68.6 million people.
The population grew at a rate of 2.36% annually between 1995 and 2000. If the annual growth rate
continues to increase at 2.36%, then the Philippine population is expected to double in
approximately 29 years. The life expectancy at birth for the total population is estimated at 68.12
years.

Another problem is that several corrupt timber magnates and Filipino politicians conspire in
illegal timber export. Deforestation continues to be one of the major sources of ecological damage
in the country, thereby threatening all animal and plant species. Resource-rich marine mangroves
and coral reefs are also rapidly disappearing due to huge commercial trawling, aquaculture,
pollution, and illegal fishing practices that include the use of cyanides and dynamite to increase
the catch.

Race and Ethnicity

The most significant ethnic minority in the Philippines is Chinese. Many Filipinos have
Chinese ancestry only because of intermarriage. However, the colonization of the islands by the
Spaniards (1565–1898) and Americans (1898–1946) has influenced the development of Philippine
society and culture. Up to 170 different spoken languages and 500 dialects exist across the
archipelago, all belonging to the Malayo-Polynesian linguistic family. While the majority of
Filipinos can speak the national language, called Tagalog, and they share the same national
identity, each group tends to identify with the primary language group to which it belongs. The
two principal languages are Tagalog, which is spoken in the provinces around Manila, and
Cebuano, which is used throughout the Visayas and Mindanao. Other major languages are
Ilocano, Hiligaynon, Bicol, Waray, Kapampangan, and Pangasinense. But at the same time,
English is widely used throughout the islands and the language of education and trade. It is
understood by 40% of the population and serves as the lingua franca in the government,
business, mass media, and academia.

These tribal groups are historically and culturally different from the mainstream group of
Filipinos and have long struggled to keep their land and cultural identity intact. The Philippines is
the only Christian nation in Asia. More than 60% of Asia’s Christian population lives in the
Philippines, and their number is increasing. In 1986, over 50 million people in the Philippines were
Christians. By the 1990s, this number reached over 65 million. Approximately 11 million people in
the Philippines are non-Catholic Christians, practicing in over 350 organizations, most of which
operate under the umbrella organization of the National Council of Churches in the Philippines.
The largest denomination includes the gospel-style Philippines for Jesus Movement and the
Iglesia ni Cristo. The largest religious minority group is the Muslim population, with Islam being a
much older presence than Christianity. The estimates of the Muslim population range between 3.9
million and 7 million or 5%–9% of the population. Approximately 94% of these Filipino Muslims are
concentrated in the western and southern parts of Mindanao, the Sulu archipelago, and the
southern part of Palawan.

Anthropologists believe that the islands of the Philippines are being inhabited for 250,000
years. The inhabitants were the Aetas, Malays and Indones who came to the Philippine islands in
different time periods. It is now believed that these ethnicities did not come in batches. Instead,
they arrived in the islands around the same time and repeated the process through the country’s
pre-colonial history. The different groups adapted to the unique environment of the island they
inhabited. For instance, some Aeta groups became masters of fishing. This is suggestive of the
idea that the culture of one ethnicity is not inferior or more advanced than the other.

To add to all the information above, the basic unit of the Philippine society is the nuclear
family, with the father as the head; the family includes extended relatives of husband and wife.
Social stratification is governed by wealth and education, which is a by-product of Spanish and
American influences. The upper class constitutes 11% (e.g., professionals, civil servants,
teachers, and business people), and the lower class comprises 89% (e.g., farmers, laborers,
fisherman, merchants, etc.). Literacy is substantially higher in the Philippines than in other
countries in Southeast Asia. According to the 2002 census, 95% of the total population 15 years of
age and over can read and write in at least one language. Literacy ranges from 91.5% in the
Greater Manila area to 55%–65% in the rural countryside. Therefore, a large proportion of the
nation’s population uses some form of mass communication. In 2003, 26 broadsheets are being
released (newspapers and tabloids), 12 of which are written in the English language. A total of 366
AM and 290 FM radio stations and 75 television and broadcast stations also existed in 2003. The
Philippine press is one of those that enjoy the most freedom worldwide because of its propensity
for muckraking, which is a legacy of American journalism.

WEEK 3:

Prehistory of the Philippines and Southeast Asia

The early history of the Philippines has a remarkable blend of the antiquity of Southeast Asia
due to the modern delimitation of the region. It is connected with the prehistoric times of China. It
was distinct to its geographical area, including Burma, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos,
Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and the Philippines. Many questions about the study of pre-colonial
settlements in the Philippines are unanswered. A considerable number of the early evidence of
the coastal communities that may have existed and used by modern archaeologists to learn more
about these settlements was washed away when the seas rose due to global warming at the end
of the last ice age, approximately 17,000 years ago. The warm and humid climate in the tropical
zone has a disintegrating effect on bamboo and other plant-like materials used by early
inhabitants to build their homes, make tools, and write. Ethnographers have unevenly studied
different ethnolinguistic and cultural groups. American archaeologists of the colonial era
(1898–1946) tended to interpret their findings in a continuous spread and overlay of human
settlements that reached into the distant past. In the south, the Sunda Shelf connected the
Philippines with Borneo, Java, and Sumatra, with the entire peninsula of Malaysia, Vietnam,
Thailand, and Cambodia. Northern Luzon was linked to Taiwan and formed the entryway to a
broad land corridor leading into China. We know that people lived in Java and China around the
mid-Pleistocene or during the ice age approximately 300,000 years ago as their remains, along
with stone implements and the bones of extinct animals, were found. Similar stone tools and
fossil remains of large prehistoric animals were found in the Cagayan Valley in northern Luzon. At
the end of the ice age, when the seas began to rise again, the Philippines became an archipelago
surrounded by water. It was already inhabited by small groups of hunters and gatherers who were
self-supporting and self-sufficient.

Approximately 7,000 years ago, food crops such as rice, millet, and legumes began to be
developed in northeastern India, Burma, Thailand, and China, one of the earliest cradles of the
Neolithic or agricultural revolution. Linguists have studied the movement of these migrating
populations by tracing the spread of their language, that is, Austronesian, which refers to a
related group of languages spoken by the peoples of Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, and Taiwan
as well as in parts of Vietnam. It is also the language of Polynesians found in the Micronesian
islands and some of the Melanesian groups. The recovery of the widely separated Austronesian
language must have a common source that preceded the discovery of the Indo-European
language family. Moving beyond Austro-Tai into Austronesian proper, the reconstruction of
linguistic prehistory, which is most widely used today, is based on a family tree of subgroups and
a hierarchy of protolanguages extending from Proto-Austronesian. Blust's (1984) reconstruction
favors a geographical expansion beginning in Taiwan (the birthplace of Austronesian languages,
including PAn), then encompassing the Philippines, Borneo, and Sulawesi, and finally bifurcating,
one branch moving west to Java, Sumatra, and Malaya, and the other branch moving east into
Oceania. The reconstructed Proto-Austronesian vocabulary, which is generally related to this
early Taiwan-Luzon phase, indicates an economy well-suited to marginal tropical latitudes with
rice, millet, and sugarcane; domestication of dogs and pigs; and the use of watercraft. The
Malayo-Polynesian (MP) subgroup later split into various lower-order Western and Central-Eastern
branches as a result of further colonization excursions across the Philippines into Borneo,
Sulawesi, and the Moluccas. The Moluccas are thought to be where the Central-Eastern MP split,
and Eastern MP encompasses all Austronesian languages of the Pacific Islands, with the
exception of a few in western Micronesia. The vocabulary of Proto-MP, which is a linguistic entity
that might have been located somewhere in the Philippines, is of considerable interest because it
contains several low economic indicators that were absent earlier and more northerly
Proto-Austronesian stage (Bellwood, 2006).

Several proto-Austronesian speakers carried the rice culture across the sea to northern
Luzon, Philippines from Taiwan at approximately 3,000 B.C.E. Essentially, rice is a tropical and
subtropical crop whose cultivation depends on water. Southeast Asia is in a monsoon zone and
has soggy soil that is well suited for rice farming. Rice can be cultivated in two ways, as follows:
Dry rice cultivation is a form of shifting agriculture that involves planting rice on the dry ground
either by sowing in the wind or planting seeds in holes punched by digging sticks after the
existing vegetation has been cut. Wet rice cultivation involves the use of germinated seeds that
are planted in a seedbed. When these rice plants are approximately a foot high, they are
transplanted. Fields are often plowed with the help of a carabao, which is a buffalo-like animal in
the Philippines. Considering that wet rice irrigation and planting involve remarkable cooperation
between many groups of people, it expanded upon the earlier settlement patterns and increased
the population.

Most of the descendants of the MPs were seafarers, who carried their traditions through the
entire expanse of the Pacific Ocean. Many theories exist about the movement of peoples of the
Pacific from the coast of South Asia through the major archipelago of Southeast Asia in the
western borders of the Pacific in Neolithic times. Most of these theories are based on the
existence of cultural traits or artifacts of material culture that exhibit similar characteristics as
reported from archaeological sites in these areas. The close relationship between the early
peoples of the Philippines and Polynesia is demonstrated by the similarities in the types of stone
tools and pottery they used. Other similar artifacts made from shells have been found in profusion
in the archaeological sites of Oceana. Domesticated plant and animal evidence are also
conclusive. One of the oldest domesticated plants is the taro. The differentiation and distribution
of this plant have been traced by archaeologists as moving from south Asia going north to Japan
and south into New Caledonia, New Zealand, and Fiji. Only three animals, that is, dog, pig, and
chicken, are domesticated from Southeast Asia to Polynesia. These animals have originated from
Southeast Asia. Thus, the early Southeast Asian seafarers were highly skilled canoe builders and
navigators who sailed across the Pacific by using their bodily senses as their compass at a time
when almost all of the Europeans thought such travel was impossible. In the last 2,000 years, we
can see archaeological and linguistic evidence for the existence of a world maritime trade
economy, which was similar to that of the Mediterranean (only much larger in scale) and
connected the Philippines to China, India, and the Arab and Persian lands. Hindu, Buddhist,
Taoist, and Confucian influences were absorbed and transformed in the Philippines through an
interactive process of adoption and adaptation. At approximately 1,200 C.E., Islam began to
spread to Southeast Asia as several sultanates also developed in the Philippines, especially
southern Mindanao.

Trade and Rise of Local Rulers

The warm and tropical monsoon winds, blowing from the northeast in northern winter, and
the southeast during the northern summer contributed to the development of a prosperous and
growing regional trade economy. Considering that these winds have regularly reversed direction
every season, the early Southeast Asians learned to plan their seafaring journeys following the
changing winds. They could sail with relative ease across a large expanse of ocean to visit trading
partners and relatives. Then, after resting for a while, they ride home with the wind. The relative
ease and safety with which people could travel encouraged increases in material and cultural
exchanges. The tropically rich vegetative cover and congenial topography of the islands made it
relatively comfortable to walk on foot or sail. Many islands around the archipelago are
interconnected by landfills and waterways with well-sheltered bays and protected harbors. Trade
over land and sea brought new people in contact with one another, ranging from upland hunters
and gatherers and horticulturalists to the complex chiefdoms and states of South, Southeast, and
Northeast Asia. Maritime trade encouraged widespread social, cultural, and economic changes
throughout the region. It introduced new people to different religious and political backgrounds
who shaped, as they were shaped by, the development of local histories and hierarchies.

The geographical boundaries between these communities or mandalas were porous and
fluid; foreigners could become friends or even family if they marry by engaging in trade or an
apprenticeship to share sacred knowledge. New leaders who recognized a potentially powerful
trade partner who promised to bring in prestige goods could arise. These rulers occasionally took
Indic titles, such as rajah, which was derived from Sanskrit, to distinguish their descendants as
members of a royal lineage. They traded valuable heirlooms, such as legendary swords, icons,
and relics that accorded a spiritual essence that filled them and their people with sacred power.
However, although rajahs could pass down their titles and wealth to their children, they could be
usurped from power when strong leaders emerged. Thus, the office of rajah or chief could be
either inherited or achieved through competition in early Philippine society. Kinship still played an
integral role in the development of local hierarchies. In contrast to Northeast Asia (e.g., China,
Korea, and Japan), a large and impersonal state bureaucracy never developed in the Philippines;
instead, numerous competing centers of power whose rulers strove not to colonize their
neighbors but to include them in their networks of kith and kin were established. Communities of
relatives and friends were developed as children grew up and got married, thereby building their
homes adjacent to parents on either side of the family. The boundaries separating these
communities were in a state of fluidity and shifted as new alliances were formed, histories
coalesced, and new leaders emerged.
 Local leaders were distinctive because they can entice followers who cooperated in religious
and scholarly, ritual, agricultural, commercial, and military matters. Such leaders replaced or
incorporated the previous ancestral line of the community into their own by achieving the title of
village ancestor. These leaders cultivated followers by engaging in reciprocal exchanges. They
possessed divine spiritual force, which enabled them to maintain harmonious social interactions
inside and between groups, as well as between the earth and the universe. The collapse of a
monarch's network of reciprocity and exchange, or the anarchy that occurred in times of natural
tragedy, signaled the decline of a ruler, and people flocked to follow a new authority. Personal
authority was seen differently in Southeast Asia than it is in the Western perspective. Power was
an existential fact, not an abstraction as it is in Western social theory. Indigenous signs indicated
a powerful ruler. A powerful leader was seen as pure in terms of his or her ability to concentrate
and disperse power, not in a moralistic sense. The ability to manage one's environment and one's
inner self are inextricably linked. The following are the apparent signs of a leader: one had
“radiance” about them, one who was sexually fertile, and one who had surrounded oneself with
sacred objects, and people who held unusual power to absorb it vicariously. Leaders wore and
distributed “magic” amulets, uttered formulaic prayers, and believed that their weapons and
personages, were invincible in times of battle. Locals, on the other hand, saw defeat in combat or
a decline in a ruler's wealth as indicators of a leader's waning inner strength. Hence, the
projection and recognition of charismatic leadership and authority around the Philippine
archipelago were a local matter. Social transformations occurred as foreign influences were
selectively reinvented, and they were specific to the conventions of a particular community.

Indian and Chinese Influences

Some of the earliest known influences came from Hindu and Buddhist traders and monks
who exchanged textiles and other sacred gifts for local and Chinese wares. They introduced new
religious rituals and political forms of behavior. However, the inhabitants of the Philippine islands
did not blindly accept the Hindu belief system and way of life; instead, they selectively integrated
what they perceived to be useful Hindu notions into their already existing animistic beliefs and
practices. Early local rulers adopted Hindu titles, such as rajah, and accompanying
accouterments to enhance their spiritual and political power. The term Visaya (Vijaya), which
seemed to refer to the central group of the islands in the Philippines, is suggestive of her place in
the Hindu tributary system. Few known Hindu artifacts include the 1,790-gram 21-karat gold Hindu
goddess of Agusan, which is on display in the Chicago Natural History Museum. The scarcity of
ancient Hindu, Buddhist, or shamanistic scripts and material remains may be attributed to the fact
that Spanish colonizers destroyed pagan icons and books in their wake. In contrast to Bali,
Indonesia, Hindu temple complexes were never built in stone in the ancient Philippines. However,
substantial archaeological and historical evidence indicated the existence of many small trading
centers that specialized in the production of prestige goods (e.g., potteries, textiles, medicinal
plants, and decorative plumes) for trade and exchange as tributes. One of the earliest known
maritime Southeast Asian states to do business with traders in the Philippines was the Sri-Vijaya
Empire from Indonesia, which controlled east-west trade through the Strait of Malacca for 400
years from 700 C.E. to 1,100 C.E. Sri-Vijaya was close to southern Philippines and located at the
southernmost tip of Sumatra, inland along the Musi River, which flows out into the Malacca Strait,
at the crossroads of sea trade. The Sri-Vijaya had a powerful navy that punished pirates and
protected foreign ships by allowing them safe passage through the straits. Sri-Vijaya became one
of the most important clearinghouse centers for exchange and export to the west. The river
provided inhabitants with access to a wide variety of products and offered them a safe and secure
harbor. At first, this community was self-sufficient in food production. However, over time, the
population multiplied and expanded its territory further upriver to the coasts.

Sri-Vijayans formed a pact with the Javanese, who then supplied them with rice. Although
these two communities did not always agree with each other and even fought occasionally, they
mostly prospered together in peace and harmony through marriage and trade alliances. The
Sri-Vijaya Empire began to decline in the 1400s when the Chinese came to dominate Southeast
Asian sea trade. A sudden increase in the population during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644 C.E.) in
combination with the frequent outbreaks of infectious diseases, such as the measles and
smallpox epidemics in 1407, 1410, 1411, and 1413, may have further instigated the Chinese to
search for additional sources of supplies, especially medicinal herbs. Famous mariners, such as
General Zheng He, who commandeered the emperor’s fleet of 48 treasure ships in 1409, began to
develop an elaborate set of tributary networks through the use of diplomacy; force, if needed; and
the giving of tribute to local rulers, who acknowledged China’s supremacy in return. Local
ambassadors and dignitaries were escorted back with the tribute missions to pay homage to the
Chinese emperor. They were treated with remarkable hospitality and accorded the full dignity and
splendor of their rank and title. Only local rulers who were recognized by the Chinese emperor
were allowed to participate in its expanding network of trade and exchange. Thus, local and
competing Philippine leaders could build up their power and notoriety with their place in the
celestial order of the Middle Kingdom.

Coming of Islam

Islam was transmitted to Sumatra and Java by Arab and Persian traders and missionaries in
the 13th century, although earlier Muslim trading sites existed in the region. As Islam began to
spread rapidly after the death of Prophet Muhammad in 632, Arabia emerged as one of the most
important centers of commerce and culture. Arab and other Muslim traders and sailors were the
intermediaries between Asian merchants and European traders. As these Muslims converted local
rulers and their retainers, their trade networks also expanded. One of the earliest rulers to convert
to Islam was the banished prince of Palembang origin, Parameswara, who ran away from the
Javanese court to settle in a small fishing village on the island of Malacca. In 1405, he swore his
allegiance to the Chinese emperor, for which he had rewarded a seal of investiture, thereby
recognizing Malacca as an independent kingdom. Parameswara’s maneuver infuriated the
Javanese and Siamese; the latter royal courts claimed that the island was their territory, but they
felt helpless to do anything about it for fear of antagonizing the powerful Chinese. Afterward,
Malacca became a favorite stopover for Muslim traders to sit out the long monsoon season. In
1414, they encouraged the prince to adopt Islam and form a marriage alliance with one of the
Muslim princesses of Pasai. Malacca soon became one of the greatest sea emporiums in
Southeast Asia, overshadowing its neighboring ports.

Courtly demeanors and the court language, that is, Malay, which once served as the language
of trade and communication throughout much of Southeast Asia, began to be replaced by Arabic
as Arabic beliefs and practices gained in ascendance. However, the Vijayan courtly demeanor that
is based on loyalty, marriage alliances, and trade never went away but remained alongside new
Islamic forms. Therefore, one of the earliest sultanates to develop in the Philippines was the Sulu
island chain, which was off the coast of Borneo. Islam was introduced there by early Chinese
traders and Muslim missionaries during the Ming dynasty in the 14th century. However, in 1450,
the Sumatran sultan, Sayyid Abu Bakhr, married a local princess that Sulu became a prominent
center of Muslim trade and culture. Rulers living across the sea on Mindanao and elsewhere in the
Philippines soon realized that they could benefit by participating in the growing Muslim trade
networks. They could gain wealth and further solidify their power by surrounding themselves with
large armies and slaves, which strengthened their ability to collect tribute and build new alliances.
Although Muslim rulers believed that all were equal in the eyes of one God and did not believe in
slavery, and only debt bondage and freed slaves once converted, they still believed they could
capture and enslave non-Muslims. While this created a new dichotomy between Muslims and
non-Muslims, the division between slaves and masters existed long before the arrival of Islam in
Southeast Asia.

Ancient Asian Slavery Systems

 Diverse religious and philosophical traditions exerted influence over the formation of
different slavery systems in Southeast Asia. While the institutionalization of slavery may have
nothing to do with Buddhism and Confucianism as envisioned by the founders, namely, Buddha
and Confucius, respectively, Confucianism and Buddhism still advocated a specific social order
of hierarchy, that is, that of serving the king. While Buddhism diverged from Hinduism, it
continued to be informed by Hindu cultural ideas and practices. The Buddhist occupation with
merit making and harmonious coexistence with all life forms, coupled with Hindu notions of caste
and hierarchy, coalesced with the open system of slavery as practiced in ancient Thailand. In
comparison, the Chinese Confucian interest in following lines of authority through kinship that
ranked people according to age level and that placed ancestors over the living, seniors over
juniors, males over females, and male scholars over commoners, fit with the closed system of
slavery in ancient Vietnam. Hinduism, Buddhism, and Chinese Confucianism influenced the
development of different Southeast Asian systems of slavery. This was the case in the precolonial
Philippines, where a mixture of Hindu/Buddhist, Confucian, and Islamic notions was selectively
integrated into already existing systems of debt bondage. A basic understanding of the distinctive
differences between Buddhism and Confucianism, as illustrated by the way of ancient Thailand
and China, is important to understanding this chapter’s closing discussion on the early Philippine
system that already existed in contrast to Spanish colonial Christianity.

Thai Buddhist Slavery

Thai history has long been influenced by Buddhist and Hindu social teachings. In contrast to
India or China, where genealogical links are largely traced through the male lines, genealogies are
traced bilaterally through the male and female side of the family in Thailand. Thai daughters, not
sons, are expected to take care of their parents when they get old. This horizontal status accorded
to both sexes is offset thus far as Thai females always were considered a property of either their
father’s household or husband’s household. Female slaves were definitively valued for their
contribution to sexual reproduction and as second wives and concubines, although a father or
husband who sold his daughter or wife into bondage in times of starvation or financial hardship in
former times could keep her at home as long as he paid the interest on the loan. A free person
previously had to demonstrate that he was over his head in debt and desperately poor before he
could legally sell any member of his household or himself into slavery; otherwise, he would be
severely punished according to the law. Buddhism also mitigated some of the harsher effects of
slavery as it was viewed as meritorious, and slaves had some rights against owners who
transgressed the boundaries of their sexual rights. Slaves could also possess private properties,
some of which were entrusted in positions of authority over other slaves and free clients.
Historically, Thais practiced an open-ended form of slavery that was theologically oriented around
Buddhist ideas of a galactic order, and even the king of Siam was said to be a slave of Buddha.
Similar to India, Thailand has a philosophy of a coming of a just and righteous king. In times of
judicious and benevolent kingship, social life is said to be replete with a bountiful harvest and
harmonious relationships that produce a popular feeling of well-being. Conversely, duplicitous,
selfish kingships mark times of bad harvest and social disruption. The ancient system of slavery
in Thailand, similar to precolonial Philippines albeit in a different guise, was a form of debt
slavery; men and women could “buy” their freedom.

Laws that guaranteed basic rights are in place. Free clients and slaves were often perceived
to be living on the same level in terms of status. Occasionally, slaves (e.g., temple slaves) held
substantially higher stations than those who were free of bondage. The king held most slaves and
divided them between princes (and leading monks) in exchange for their loyal service in
governing the kingdom. Slaves were a symbol of luxury and wealth, but Thai society was not
oriented around slavery as an economic system because slaves worked alongside free clients.
Typically, freemen and their families were self-sufficient subsistence farmers who worked the
king’s land and who could be called, within reasonable guidelines, by royal administrators to
provide food and labor on construction projects for the kingdom. The Thai system of slavery
might be “feudal” in nature. The slave had many of the same modes of entry into slavery that were
found in China, that of conquest, war, capture, and being “sold,” but there is the added aspect of
the debt slave, who may or may not be redeemable. Being redeemable means that one’s debts
might eventually either be worked off or paid off, and the condition of slavery diminished, and the
slave freed. Other forms of slavery, such as judicial or temple slaves, are not commonly found in
China. The temple slaves were on occasion those who placed themselves into service because
the life of the temple slave might be viewed as better than the life of the freed person occasionally.
Slaves were exempt from mandatory labor requirements, and those services they provide were
lighter than other forms of slavery. Regarding slaves of war and conquest, such as tens of
thousands that were taken by the Siamese in the wars against the Khmer Empire in the 14th
century, this was by far the most common because population may decrease that only an outside
infusion of bodies could maintain the community. Frequent warfare was a form of competition for
a loyal following, not a territory, and helped reproduce the local population, which was often
ravaged and depleted by the spread of diseases such as malaria and smallpox, famines, floods,
droughts, and raids. These slaves were then redistributed among nobles according to their rank,
while some were donated to temple services. These slaves were commissioned by the king to
build new temples in distant and remote regions to win the local community’s support and loyalty.
Slaves served another function as a form of exchange and tribute. Thus, the use of slaves became
more than the acquisition of a labor force and a replacement population. However, a political and
economic exchange that was used to pay off debts influenced the political atmosphere. Thai
slaves were mainly absorbed and absolved instead of freed or made kin. While the entire subject
is complicated, the groundwork here is enough to distinguish the Thai system of slavery from the
Euro-colonial type. We now turn to a discussion on the ancient Chinese and the Philippine
systems of slavery.

Early Chinese Slavery

China has been long influenced by Confucian social teachings. In contrast to Thailand, where
the family tree is traced bilaterally through the male and female lines, in China, genealogical links
are recorded over the generations through male ties. Chinese females are perceived as outsiders;
they are nameless in ancestral rites, and their primary role is to bear male heirs. A female could
enter into domestic household service as a maid or child servant. In that case, she might be
adopted as a younger sister and become part of the family. Alternatively, she would be arranged
into an exogamous marriage, occasionally as a child bride. Meanwhile, the bride price for the first
wife was high, it was transformed into a dowry, and the marriage rite itself marked the
transference of certain rights and privileges to her. By contrast, the primary role of second wives
was to produce sons, while concubinage was for pleasure. Matchmakers arranged the sale of
maids, brides, concubines, and prostitutes privately. Slaves in ancient China found themselves in
a closed system. As a rule, slaves in China were born as slaves or purchased as children, in
addition to the purchase of concubines by the wealthy. While the potential for slaves to alter or
change their status was open in Thailand, that opportunity was extremely limited in China. Given
that China is a strictly patriarchal society, any inclusion of males into the lineage would constitute
a threat to existing heirs because this would cause further division of property at the death of the
clan head. Therefore, males who were not purchased as children for replacement heirs (indicating
the absence of other heirs) were suspended in permanent slave status, although eunuchs were of
high status because they were loyal and powerful (e.g., they generally served the emperors royal
court). Watson explained that girls had more freedom than boys did once they became slaves
because boys would enter their new life either as an heir or lifelong servant. Females had more
tangible opportunities for improving their situation through marriage. Chinese women were
considered as belonging to, rather than being in, the kinship line even when they married within it.
Given that they did not have any inheritance right that would have been recognized or supported,
they were not considered a threat. Therefore, they had more social mobility than men did. China
created its supply of slaves from within by creating stratification within its social structure; taking
its slaves from within that created a “lower” class.
 The stigma attached to the status of a slave did not only last a lifetime but for subsequent
generations of slaves. This phenomenon can be traced back to the Chinese practice of ancestor
worship. The Chinese viewed belonging to a lineage as a requirement for being considered a
civilized person. Given that the males were carriers of the lineage, even the poorest farmers would
resist selling their sons until all the daughters and even the wife were sold. For example, they
would sell their sons to save them from dying from starvation. This attitude resulted in a few
males on the market. Thus, males were priced high. This practice repeatedly disrupted the male
slaves’ ancestral lines. Thus, the slaves, in essence, never developed a family line, and their
hereditary relatives remained unknown. In some modern cases, the ancestral line might be
invented to conceal a lack of ancestry. This slave market system based on use value and not
exchange value was transformed when the European colonizers came to China. The Europeans
brought and introduced their habit of buying and selling slaves as if they were only material
objects, which was an affront and contrary to ancient Asian codes, which provided slaves with
certain rights and social security.

Ancient Philippine Slavery

The Philippines experienced a mélange of religious and philosophical influences before the
colonial period. Underlying Hindu, Buddhist, and Islamic faiths were widespread and intermingled
with indigenous beliefs and practices that were informed by animistic nature worship. The
economy was engaged in a maritime trade economy that extended far beyond Southeast Asia.
Local communities were dispersed along estuaries of rivers and coastal shores, with each
settlement scattered to protect the residents from the possibility of offshore slave raiders. Each
community’s individual history was made up of a complex of local histories wherein leaders were
legitimated by their followers, relative to even wider concentric networks or mandalas, of power.
Chiefdoms existed, that is, the office of the chief was ordinarily inherited, and a redistributive
system wherein slavery was a key component was in place. However, as a check on their
authority, the office of the chief (rajah or datu) was also achieved, and the center of redistribution
shifted as new leaders emerged.

The system of slavery in the Philippines was a far-reaching and complex system that differed
dramatically from, and existed in utter contradistinction to, the Euro-American transatlantic slave
trade system. In contrast to the European colonial system where slaves were supplied in the
market, slaves in the Philippines often shared the same ethnicity, language, and descent as their
masters. Parents frequently arranged the marriage of their young children by turning over several
slaves in good faith. Men often sold themselves into slavery to their fathers-in-law as a form of
bride price, which was similar to what Jacob did for the hand of Rachel and Leah as told in the
Bible. Almost everyone was indebted to someone else to some degree, and slavery in this sense
was endemic. Generally, slaves took a good deal of satisfaction in being attached to their masters.
Various types of slaves ranged from those captured for ransom in raids at one extreme to those
who sold themselves into slavery to someone for whom they felt a debt of gratitude from the heart
in other extremes. Except for those living inside their master’s house, slaves were expected to
support themselves, working part-time for their owners, while the owners themselves were
generally enslaved to other masters. Kinship played an important role in the development of debt
bondage on the islands. Family networks and lineages were traced bilaterally through both the
female and male lines. This phenomenon diminished the importance of status based on lineage
connections to a single female or male ancestor; instead, important genealogical claims were
based on achieving a founding line of descent and establishing fictive kin relations horizontally in
the present. This emphasis on the present had an impact on how the master-slave bond emerged
locally, where social relations, not private property, were highly valued. Customary interactions
between masters and slaves in this context were mutually respectful. The coming of the Spanish
colonizers to the Philippines with their different habits and worldview was an affront to the
cultural ethos and common sense of mutual well-being. Spanish colonial processes profoundly
and irreversibly disrupted and altered local practices, and the effect of this influence should not
be underestimated. However, local motifs and customary forms of behavior continued to
re-emerge in new guises and resisted the colonial design.

WEEK 4:
A Historian's Critical Questions

Students who study history sometimes confuse sources with evidence. Good historical sources
merely provide raw information that scholars can reconstruct into evidence. Historians use reconstructed
historical evidence to make historical arguments about what happened in the past. To collect evidence,
historians examine sources by reading closely and asking critical questions.

Students of history should also note that sources of history are subjective. Meaning, persons who
document and interpret history usually have his/her unique point of view about what is happening.

We get historical information from primary and secondary sources. Analyzing historical information
includes answering the following:

● Who produced this source, and what is his/her background? Is the author’s biography (i.e.
point of view and personal experience) relevant to comprehending this source? Was the
author biased or dishonest? Did he/she have a plan/agenda?
● When and where was this source created? Is it similar to other sources from the same
period? In what ways is it a product of the time, place, or context in which it was created?
● What motivated the author to create this source? Who was his/her intended audience? And
what’s the point? Is the author’s purpose (or argument) stated explicitly or implicitly? Was it
meant to be used in a public or private setting? Is it a scholarly work, a work of fiction, a work
of art, or a piece of propaganda?
● How does this source compare to the other sources you’ve looked at for this study? Is it
biased toward a particular argument? Incorporate or neglect significant pieces of evidence?
Does it structure its argument according to similar (or different) periods, geographies,
participants, themes, or events?

Sources of History

1. Primary Sources of History

Primary sources are materials produced in the period studied. They reflect the immediate concerns
and perspectives of those who are experiencing the historical events studied. Typical examples of primary
studies are diaries, correspondence, dispatches, newspaper editorials, speeches, economic data,
literature, art, and film. This type of historical source allows the historian to see the past through direct
participants' points of view.

The primary sources used in this research are from the time period under consideration. These
sources include witnesses and artifacts. Familiar primary sources include newspapers, correspondence,
memoirs, laws, official documents, and published works.
 (Mariano Peji and Filipino sailors at the U.S. Naval Academy posed in basketball uniforms circa 1926,
UMD Libraries Digital Collections Filipino American Community Archives)

Looking at the primary source above, we can make assumptions about the American Occupation in
the Philippines. First, we can say that the sport basketball has reached our shores. Another assumption
we can make is about how Filipinos dressed when playing sports. Lastly, we may be able to assume
some information based on the building behind the people in the picture.

(The Royal Kandit, Villegas, 2004)

Non-text materials are also considered as primary sources of history if they were made by people
experiencing the historical events in question. The golden Royal Kandit shown above is an artifact dating
from between the 10th and 13th century and was found in Surigao. It is made of gold, about 74
centimeter, and weighs about a kilogram. If we analyze the information about the golden belt, we may ask
questions about how ancient Filipinos in Surigao were able to craft and own ornate pieces of precious
gold.

Evaluating Primary Sources

Like an investigative report, historical arguments try to establish how things may have happened.
Still, we have to be careful with interpreting primary sources as these are not perfect documentations of
historical events. Thus, we should also compare sources with each other to check their credibility.

A fair reading of history involves asking questions about historical sources. You can be a critical
reader if you use your historical imagination and envision what could have happened if historical
characters were in different circumstances. Primary source analysis will help you gather information about
details that can be put together to form an idea of a historical event or period.
 Professor Patrick Rael, who was a Professor of History at Bowdoin College, developed an acronym
for evaluating primary source texts (PAPER) (Rael, 2004):

1. P – Purpose of the maker in preparing the source

Knowing the purpose of the author or maker of a primary source includes finding out the role or
place of that person in the society he/she lived in. The social structure and culture of the maker will help
us form a basis for the development of the source.

2. A – Arguments and strategies used to achieve these goals

What ideas are the maker trying to convey by documenting a historical event or period? You may
also ask who the maker’s audience is and what is the maker’s strategy in communicating to his/her
audience. For instance, Anne Frank, who lived in the Nazi Period in Germany, made a dairy. The diary
contents are most probably intended for her private reading. At present, historian now know that Anne’s
father edited some pages to remove sensitive content. Knowing these details helps us read between the
lines and assume the “unwritten.” This analysis also enables us to know how credible or reliable the
source is.

(Anne Frank's Diary, The History Channel, 2018)

1. P – Presuppositions and values

We can also analyze a primary source by examining how the beliefs of the maker differ or are similar
to ours. This process highlights the values of the maker. At times, it may be uncomfortable to us to read
about slave-raiding of ancient Filipino tribes, but we consider their behavior as a product of their time
because they value different things (i.e. familial ties and food production).

2. Epistemology

An epistemological reading of a primary source will give us information that can be factually proven.
These facts are not explicitly shown in the material. For instance, we can date Anne Frank’s diary using
the material of the paper or the ink that was used.
 3. R – Relate to other texts

We can infer some things from reading various primary sources from different makers or
writers. We can do this by highlighting repetitive themes across sources. An example would be
the current reading of Ferdinand Magellan’s purpose in coming to the Philippines: some
historians suggest that he came for trade and not as a conquistador, effectively dating the
Spanish Colonization of the Philippines to 1565 instead of 1521. (Gerona, 2021)

Secondary Sources of History

Another source of history is secondary sources. If you tried to answer the questions above or made
interpretations about the primary sources in the previous photos, the documentation of your ideas can be
considered a secondary source of history.

Secondary sources are materials produced after the period that is studied and is made by a person
who did not experience the historical events he/she was writing about. Secondary source creators
typically lived during the time period being examined, but their work was based on a primary source.
Historians use secondary sources to learn how other historians have viewed the past.

Historians using secondary sources consider the historical subject with ample background of the
sources' origin and generally select, analyze, and incorporate evidence (derived from primary sources) to
make an argument. Works of scholars are the most common secondary sources.

(5000 Php Banknote with Lapulapu and the Philippine Eagle, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, 2021)

A common secondary source of history are Philippine banknotes. The 5,000-peso banknote shown
above shows a realistic sketch of Lapulapu. The way he looks in the banknote is informed by investigating
the bodily adornment customs and the physical characteristics of Visayans. It is NOT a photograph of
Lapulapu. In other words, the banknote does not give a perfect picture of what Lapulapu looks like
because it is only a rendition.

The book cover in the photo shows a volume of secondary historical material
written by Rolando Borrinaga. He conducted a modern and Waraynon reading of the
correspondence among Waray, Bicolano, Tagalog, and Cebuano revolutionaries in the
Spanish and American Colonial Periods. His opinions and inferences are informed by
other primary sources such as maps, laws, and photographs.

Secondary sources are also reliable sources of information, despite them being
mere copies of primary sources. They are reliable because they tend to be informed by
analysis of culture and historical periods. Secondary works such as scholarly work
usually show readers what part of the work are facts and what are opinions or intelligent guesses.
Secondary sources will alert you to any historical controversies, disagreements, or key questions that
historians are grappling with. Additionally, makers of secondary sources are not emotionally tied to the
period they are examining.

Similar to primary sources, we need investigative skills in reading secondary historical material.
Secondary sources can be interpreted in different ways since each reader will know a different set of
information and will have a different point of view. We need to think through the material and connect it to
other sources. We also need to be careful in distinguishing between scholarly and non-scholarly
secondary sources.

When we join history classes, we are usually asked by our teachers to explore the discussions of
other scholars by writing essays. Our historical essays can be considered as secondary sources, as long
as we provide enough information about the following:

● Maker or writer of the source/material

● The maker’s or author’s expertise, training, and theoretical approach
● The maker’s or author’s explanation of why and how the events happened
● The maker’s or author’s argument or point of view about the historical period or event talked
about
● The evidence that the maker or author cited to support his/her argument
● The parts of the material that makes the argument weak
● The structure and form of the source (text, art, film, etc.)
● Any competing material that affects the way the material being studied is structured
● How different or similar to works on the same topic is the material.

Credibility and Reliability

Aside from analyzing the content of sources, historians also examine the credibility and reliability of
historical sources.

A. Credibility
Credible sources are those that are transparent about approaches, biases, and points of view. They
do this by highlighting what is not known at the moment and what are accepted as facts while making
arguments.

B. Reliability
Reliable sources are those that are relay as facts those that can be verified with evidence. For
example, dates in historical material can be corroborated by other materials such as laws or new reports.
MIDTERM
WEEK 7:

The primary sources can be classified into the following categories:

● Contemporary Records:

These primary sources are instruction documents, stenographic and phonographic records,
business and legal papers, autobiographies, etc. They may even be in the form of appointment
notifications and direction from a foreign office to the ambassador (Aggarwal, n.d.). Generally,
such records have a minimal chance of error, but it is essential to ascertain their authenticity.

The business and legal letters consist of the bills, journals, leases, wills, and tax records,
which provide insights into the work of firms and persons (Modules, n.d.) Autobiographies are
credible sources of history because they are close to the events they deal with (Discussion, n.d.)
Autobiographies are also nonprejudicial.

● Confidential Reports:

Confidential reports are not intended for a general audience and are less reliable than
contemporary sources (Modules, n.d.) These reports are generally in military and diplomatic
dispatches, journals, diaries or memoirs, and personal letters.

● Public Reports:

Public reports are meant for the general public, and are much less reliable (Modules, n.d.)
They have three types, each of which possessing a different degree of reliability. Newspaper
reports and dispatches, which depend upon the agency from which it originated and the
newspaper in which it is published, is reliable. Memoirs and autobiographies are written for the
public at the close of life when the author’s memoirs are fading and unreliable. Official histories of
the activities of government or business house are also an important kind of public report
(Discussion, n.d.) They possess incriminating material and are less reliable.

● Government Documents:

Numerous government documents are also a source of vital importance to historians. These
documents include statistics about the fiscal, census, and essential matters that historians can
reference. All these reports have first-hand importance but require proper evaluation before use
(Modules, n.d.).

● Public Opinion:

As expressed in editorials, speeches, pamphlets, and letters to the editor, public opinion is
another important source available to the historian. Still, its authenticity must be corroborated by
other evidence because public opinion may not always be reliable.

● Folklores and Proverbs:

 Folklores reveal the stories of legendary heroes and are an essential source of history. They
tell us about the aspirations, superstitions, and customs of the people among whom the stories
developed (Discussion, n.d.). Folklores include “Alla-Uddal” the hero Rajputana.

To use these folklores, the historian should possess a thorough knowledge of the history of
the period and have the ability to distinguish between the legendary and authentic elements.
Similarly, proverbs can give us an idea, but scholars must know the customs and traditions
(Modules, n.d.).

"First Mass" in Limasawa: Fact or opinion?

Written by Buddy Gomez on August 17, 2019

That "First Mass" celebrated on Philippine soil was neither in Agusan nor Southern Leyte.

Was the Mass on Easter Sunday ever celebrated without first observing Palm Sunday, which
was a week before it?

Let us establish a chronology to resolve an argument over geography. Magellan came to

Homonhon before Limasawa. The National Historical Institute's (NHI) concluded that "the
first-ever Christian mass on Philippine soil on March 31, 1521, was celebrated in the island of
Limasawa." It is a conclusion the NHI reached after a "rigorous evaluative analysis and appraisal
of primary sources" of the chronicles of Antonio Pigafetta, which is "the most complete and
reliable account of Magellan's expedition."

Pigafetta (English translation from Blair & Robertson) wrote the following: "Early on the
morning of Sunday, the last of March and Easter day, the Captain-General sent the priest with
some men to prepare the place where mass was to be said." Indeed, it was the first mention of
Mass being celebrated since arriving in the islands they had just named "the archipelago of San
Lazaro." However, Pigafetta never claimed that Limasawa Easter Sunday mass was the first that
was held in the Philippines as we were taught in our grade school Philippine History.

A few noted historians now no longer refer to the Limasawa mass as the first Mass held in
the country. However, they referred to it as the first “recorded” Mass in the Philippines. Hence, the
first Mass may have been unrecorded, but historians did not officially affirm this theory. The 500th
Anniversary of that March 31, 2021 event should have been referred to as the "Easter Sunday
Mass" at Limasawa.

How this supposed error came to be and who might have caused and perpetuated it do not
seem to be of any importance anymore. When this error is pointed out, correction by concerned
authorities must be in order. However, this phenomenon would pose an academic challenge as a
subject for a master's degree thesis on a historical "whodunnit!"

The voyage of Magellan from San Lucar de Barrameda to "the archipelago of San Lazaro"
spanned for one year, six months, and a couple of weeks. It would be preposterous to conclude
that no other masses were held before that in Limasawa and even claimed it as the Philippines'
first-ever Mass because it was unrecorded or Pigafetta failed to record it. After all, masses occur
with regularity every Sunday.

Between Magellan's voyage up to their arrival in Zubu (Cebu), Pigafetta only recorded five
masses being held. Hence, other masses must have been held throughout the voyage, but
Pigafetta must have also failed to record them. We also have to consider that Magellan's crew is
composed of three priests.

While along the coast of Verzin (Brazil), Pigafetta wrote the following: "mass was said twice
onshore, during which those people (natives) remained on their knees." In the Patagonian port of
San Julian, he wrote the following: "April 1 (1520) Palm Sunday, Magallanes summoned all his
captains, officers, and pilots, to go ashore to hear mass…." The fourth instance was when they
were in Limasawa, and the fifth was when they reached Zubu.

However, Magellan anchored and stayed in Humunu (Homonhon) for eight days, from Sunday
to Sunday, departing on March 25, 1521. After months of floating in the Pacific seas, they finally
landed on a Sunday. Pigafetta did not record anything on this day. He also did not record their
second Sunday in Homonhon, which was Palm Sunday.

While in the port of San Julian, Pigafetta recorded a mass on Palm Sunday, which fell on April
1, 1520 (a year earlier), but he did not mention holding a mass on Easter Sunday. Pigafetta
mentioned the Easter Sunday mass in Limasawa but did not record Palm Sunday on their last full
day in Homonhon.

Was Easter Sunday mass ever celebrated without observing Palm Sunday? Or was Palm
Sunday observed without a mass on Easter Sunday?

Here is the chronology from Pigafetta's memoirs:

● "At dawn on Saturday, March 16, 1521, (feast of St. Lazarus) we came upon a highland
at a distance… an island named Zamal (Samar)… the following day (March 17, Sunday)
the captain-general desired to land on another island (Humunu)… uninhabited… to be
more secure and to get water and have some rest. He had two tents set up on shore
for the sick."
● "On Monday, March 18, we saw a boat coming towards us with nine men in it. This
marks our first human contact with Europeans, giving signs of joy because of our
arrival… At noon on Friday, March 22, those men came as they had promised."
● "And we lay eight days in that place, where the captain every day visited the sick men
who he had put ashore on the island to recover."

The masses recorded by Pigafetta had two things in common: they were both observed
onshore with the presence of the natives.

Homonhon, which is a barangay of the Municipality of Guiuan in Eastern Samar, may have
been neglected as the true venue of the first Sunday mass in the Philippines, which may have
occurred either on March 17, 1521 or March 24, 1521 (Palm Sunday), possibly due to failure in
historiographic interpretation.

WEEK 8:

Three Good Qualities of a Good Historian:

1. A good historian draws his conclusions and generalizations based on documents and facts.
2. A historian thoroughly checks the authenticity and factuality of the documents and
accounts.
3. The historian should doubt every statement until it has been critically tested.
Two Types of Historical Criticism

Source: https://sirdenzmodules.blogspot.com/2019/06/my-first-blog.html

1. External Criticism:

“External criticism” is a less intellectual type of criticism of the documents. It includes examining
documents such as manuscripts, books, pamphlets, maps, inscriptions, and monuments. The document's
authenticity arises more in the case of manuscripts than printed copies because the editor has already
authenticated printed documents.

The historian has to resort to several tests to determine a particular document's authenticity in his
proposed area of research. These tests include “authorship," which is the first question in examining that
a document's author is correct. Even anonymous writings can provide us valuable and essential
knowledge. Still, discovering an author’s or writer’s name adds to the authenticity of the information
because the author's character, connections, and trustworthiness determine the legitimacy.

Second, the “date of the document” is the time and place of publication of the document that
determines its authenticity. In modern publications, the year and location of publication are indicated on
the title page or backside (overleaf) of the book or document. However, in old manuscripts where the date
and place are absent, this information can be determined through the language or the author's date of
birth and death.

Third, the historian is confronted with textual errors that may be either unintentional or deliberately
committed. Unintentional errors can occur in the copies of the documents where authentic materials are
not available. Sometimes mistakes like these may be committed by the scribe, typist, or printer.

An intentional error may be shown when an act is made to alter, supplement, or continue the
original. That is why criticism is essential to challenge this kind of error. Under this technique, historians
collect as many copies of dubious text as possible, then compare them.

Historians' textual inaccuracy can also be solved through “sciences auxiliary” to history, such as
“paleographists,” who have authenticated numerous medieval period documents through the authors’
handwriting and have published easily legible printed versions.

“Archaeologists” provide rich information to historians. “Numismatists” also provide information by

dating coins and metals and deciphering their inscriptions.

Fourth, after confirming the sources' authenticity, historians are confronted with different terms used
in documents. Language is dynamic; therefore, the meaning of words changes over time. Thus, the
historian must determine the meaning and essence of a word based on the time and context of its
utilization. The misinterpretation of terms often may lead to confusion and ambiguity in the historical
development.

2. Internal Criticism:

A document contains the idea of the writer. A good historian analyzes the documents' contents to
determine the true meaning. He must avoid reading into meaning that the author did not convey and
determine. He or she should remain neutral at all times and avoid insisting on his ideas or theories,
especially when the historical evidence contradicts his or her perspective.

He must understand the document's literal and authentic meanings; this is called “positive criticism.”
It reveals the author’s conceptions and the general notion that he intends to convey. Meanwhile,
historians occasionally come across documents that contradict each other. Hence, they need to eliminate
statements and facts that are wrong.

Therefore, historians must temporarily consider unproven documents and accounts doubtful
because it will devaluate their findings, especially when the author states incompetent and unreliable
statements or conclusions. To assess the correctness of the fact, a historian must ascertain whether the
author was an actual observer of the event or not.

What was his source of information, and how much time elapsed between the event and the record?
However, a dependable testimony depends on the ability and willingness to tell the truth, the report's
accuracy, and independent corroboration. Additionally, a skillful liar may deliberately create the condition,
that is, to express the truth with accuracy and consistency to establish the credibility of his statements.
Therefore, credibility must not be accepted without proper investigation. If the contents of documents
agree, then we cannot conclude that the facts are definitive; it must be worth noting to ensure that the
facts are harmonious and prove that each other are interconnected.

Cause and Effect of the execution of Fathers Burgos, Gomez and Zamora

written by Apolinario Mabini in 1969

Source: https://www.univie.ac.at/Voelkerkunde/apsis/aufi/history/mabini03.htm

But such isolation was practicable only so long as the Europeans had to go by the Cape of Good
Hope or the Straits of Magellan in order to reach the Far East, and before steam and electric, power had
shortened distances. With the opening of the Suez Canal, the Philippines too were opened to the
commerce of the civilized world. As a free and civilized nation, Spain was ashamed to imitate China by
forbidding the islands to foreigners; besides, it did not have sufficient, strength to compel the great
powers, if the need should arise, to abide by such a decision. Thanks to the increasing ease of
communications events in Europe were already echoing in the ears of the Filipinos who, excited by these
novelties, were beginning to think anew. Their awakening became even more thorough when the Filipino
secular clergy, led by Father Burgos, appealed to the Spanish throne and Rome for the recovery of the
parishes which the Spanish government had taken from them and given to the friars, confining
themselves to missionary work, should turn over all parishes to the Spanish and Filipino secular clergy in
accordance with canon law. Since the friars were bound to lose the case because the petition was just
and lawful, they put it about that the claimants were really agitators whose aim was to seize the parishes
in order to organize an insurrection against the Spanish regime in the Philippines, The religious Orders
claimed to be the sole support of Spanish rule and that, if they were removed from the parishes, the
whole regime would come tumbling down, citing the precedent of the Mexican revolution which had been
started by secular parish priests.

At this stage of the controversy, the garrison of the Cavite Arsenal mutinied. The ringleaders of the
clerical dispute, offended because their claims had not been fairly met, were beyond any doubt, said their
enemies, also the ringleaders of the insurrection and, as such, they were condemned to death. The trial
was held amid great mystery and secrecy; the sentence was hastily carried out; afterward it was
forbidden to speak of the affair; and for these reasons no Filipino believed, or now believes, in the guilt of
the executed priests.

Although Burgos and his companions, Gomez and Zamora, had worked for the rights, of a particular
class and not of: the people as a whole, yet had they asked for justice, and died for having asked. True,
already on the scaffold, Burgos still could not understand why he should die, being innocent; which
proves that he had not before then thought it possible that he should have to sacrifice his life for the
cause he defended. But these were Christian priests, and they died like Christ, slandered by the
friar-scribes, because they had sought to take away from the friars the administration of the parishes, the
seat of their, power and influence over the masses and the principal source of their wealth. So it is that
the Filipinos keep them in grateful and imperishable memory, and the people venerate them as martyrs to
justice.

The Spanish Government did not know and did not want to know anything about the friars in the
Philippines or about the Filipinos. They first, in possession of the parishes, were in continuous contact
with the latter, and informed against their personal enemies as enemies of Spain, handing them over to
the constabulary to be tortured, and to the authorities to be banished. Those in authority who refused to
do what the friars wished lost their jobs, and the most liberal minister in Spain, when in powers did
whatever the friars wanted. The friars wanted to make an example of Burgos and his companions so that
the Filipinos should be afraid to go against them from then on. But that patent injustice, that official crime,
aroused not fear but hatred of the friars and of the regime that supported them, and a profound sympathy
and sorrow for the victims. This sorrow worked a miracle: it made the Filipinos realize their condition for
the first time. Conscious of pain, and thus conscious of life, they asked themselves what kind of a life they
lived. The awakening was painful, and working to stay alive more painful still, but one must live. How?
They did not know, and the desire to know, the anxiety to learn, overwhelmed and took possession of the
youth of the Philippines. The curtain of ignorance woven diligently for centuries was rent at last: fiat lux,
let there be light, would not be long in coming, the dawn of a new day was nearing.

The Two Faces of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny

By Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay

Source: https://nhcp.gov.ph/the-two-faces-of-the-1872-cavite-mutiny/

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

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

1872 Cavite Mutiny: Spanish Perspective

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

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

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

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

On 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish government and Frailocracia to instill fear among
the Filipinos so that they may never commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA were executed. This
event was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino nationalism.

WEEK 9:
The background of Rizal’s retraction was retrieved from Ricardo R. Pascual’s book entitled “Dr. Jose Rizal
Beyond the Grave: A Vindication of the Martyr of Bagumbayan.”

On May 18, 1935, a document was discovered in the vault of the Archbishop of Manila by Father
Manuel Gracial. This document, among others, is the much debated "original" of Dr. Jose Rizal's
retraction of his anti-Catholic writings and propaganda as well as his affiliation to Masonry. With its
discovery, the Church and her devotees claim with proud mien that this document supposed and believed
to have been mislaid was in fact lying all the while in this "providential vault" - a very providential omission
according to the Catholics - only to be brought to light in this "providential hour." Thanks to the
Providential Hand that directed the events that way. It only seems too "providential" all the way through.

Upon this discovery also, many of the opposite opinions suggest some attending circumstances that
may discredit the execution "in good faith" of this priceless document. Some say it was forced upon Rizal,
and there are examples of forced retraction which are cited as proof. The usual answer is that force is not
fitting in the character of Rizal as a means to make him do something against his will. This contention that
force cannot be used upon Rizal, because that hypothesis does not fit itself with the character of Rizal,
who simply cannot be coerced by force to do something much against his will, is an ingenious argument,
for indeed Rizal was a person of manly character. But it is also to forget that despite his manly character,
Rizal succumbed to force, however much he hated it. The proof of which is his own forced death, which
he protested against with his innocence.

Last Part of the Letter of Fr. Vicente Balaguer S.J. to Rev. Pio Pi

Yes, my dear Father, I can affirm with full certainty and Your Reverence tell all the Manila Christians
and that entire country, that Rizal was never irreligious or bigoted, never an enemy of the Church; that he
was a young man waylaid for some time by factors around him; that he was a good patriot, and desired in
good faith the welfare and the independence of his country; that he confessed to me in the chapel that he
had never approved armed revolution; that he had hoped to win autonomy and later independence
through legal means. But deep in his heart, he was in the beginning and at the end of his life a good
Christian. Let them honor the memory of Rizal, a good Christian at heart, the first hero of the Philippines.

For the full text of the letter of Fr. Vicente Balaguer S.J. to Rev. Pio Pi, visit this link:
http://www.philippinestudies.net/files/journals/1/articles/2013/public/2013-2112-1-PB.pdf

Rene Escalante (2019) discussed two different versions of Rizal’s retraction.

An Excerpt of Jesuit Version

According to Fr. Balaguer, he and Fr. Vilaclara arrived in Rizal’s prison cell around 10 o’clock in the
morning. He mentioned in his letter and affidavit that their encounter with Rizal started with a discussion
of some articles of the Catholic faith. They debated on issues such as the supremacy of faith over reason
and the dogmatic differences that divided Catholics and Protestants. Since time was not on their side,
they persuaded Rizal not to spend so much time discussing faith-related issues and focus instead on how
to die in the state of grace so that he could enter heaven. They explained to him that they could not
administer the sacraments he needed without him signing a retraction letter and making a profession of
faith. Fr. Balaguer mentioned that Rizal softened a bit when he warned him that his soul would go to hell if
he did not return to the Catholic fold. He reminded him that outside the Catholic Church, there was no
salvation (Extra Ecclesiam Catholicamnulladatursalus) (Cavanna 1956, 8). The two Jesuits left Rizal’s
prison around lunchtime, with Rizal still undecided over whether to sign the retraction letter or not. The
Jesuits went straight to the archbishop’s palace and informed their superiors of what had transpired
during their first meeting with Rizal.

Frs. Balaguer and Vilaclara returned to Rizal around 3 o’clock in the afternoon and tried until sunset
to persuade him to recant. They were still not able to convince him to sign the retraction document. Their
third meeting with Rizal took place at 10 o’clock that night, and it was during this meeting that they
showed Rizal the two retraction templates Fr. Pi had given them. According to Fr. Balaguer, Rizal found
the first template unacceptable because it was too long and its language and style were not reflective of
his personality (Arcilla 1994, 114). So Fr. Balaguer withdrew it and offered the shorter one. Rizal did not
sign it right away because he was uncomfortable with the statement “I abominate Masonry as a society
reprobated by the Church.” He said he had met Masons in London who had nothing against the Catholic
religion. Rizal wanted to emphasize that Philippine Masonry was not hostile to Catholicism and that
Masonry in London did not require its members to renounce their faith. The Jesuits allowed Rizal to revise
the retraction template, and his final version read, “I abominate Masonry as the enemy of the Church and
reprobated by the same Church” (Cavanna 1956, 9). After making other minor changes to the draft, Rizal
signed his retraction letter before midnight. Fr. Balaguer handed it over to Fr. Pi, who in turn submitted it
to Archbishop Bernardino Nozaleda (Guerrero 1971, 459).

For the full text of Jesuit version of Rizal’s retraction, visit this link:
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/seas/8/3/8_369/_pdf
An Excerpt of Cuerpo de Vigilancia Version

In his affidavit, Fr. Balaguer declared that he talked to Rizal three times on December 29, 1896. The
first time was in the morning, from 10 to 12:30. It was during this meeting that he presented the retraction
template to Rizal but the latter did not sign. Moreno Jose Rizal, Phil. Revolution, Cuerpo de Vigilancia 381
confirmed this meeting, including the presentation of the draft retraction. But he reported that Rizal was
talking not to Fr. Balaguer but to Frs. March and Vilaclara. Moreno also confirmed that Frs. March and
Vilaclara returned to Rizal around 3 o’clock in the afternoon. Fr. Balaguer claimed in his affidavit that he
was one of Rizal’s afternoon visitors. Fr. Balaguer continued that the third time he talked to Rizal was
around 10 in the evening. He had another lengthy and passionate discussion with him for more than an
hour. It was on this occasion that Rizal finally signed his retraction letter. Moreno confirmed that Rizal had
visitors after dinner, but the persons he identified were Señor Andrade, Señor Maure, and Frs. March and
Vilaclara. Again, Fr. Balaguer was not mentioned, and the time of the meeting was 9 o’clock and not
shortly before midnight. Neither did Moreno’s report mention that they discussed issues concerning faith
and the retraction. The narrative is short and ends with Rizal going to bed.

For the full text of Cuerpo de Vigilancia’s version of Rizal retraction, visit this link:
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/seas/8/3/8_369/_pdf

Peter Jaynul V. Uckung (2012) discussed the authenticity of Rizal’s Retraction.

It was supposed to have been signed by Jose Rizal moments before his death. There were
many witnesses, most of them are Jesuits. The document only surfaced for public viewing on May
13, 1935. It was found by Fr. Manuel A. Gracia at the Catholic hierarchy’s archive in Manila. But the
original document was never shown to the public, only reproductions of it.

However, Fr. Pio Pi, a Spanish Jesuit, reported that as early as 1907, the retraction of Rizal
was copied verbatim and published in Spain, and reprinted in Manila. Fr. Gracia, who found the
original document, also copied it verbatim.

In both reproductions, there were conflicting versions of the text. Add to this the date of the
signing was very clear in the original Spanish document which Rizal supposedly signed. The date
was “December 29, 1890.”

Later, another supposedly original document surfaced, bearing the date “December 29,
189C”. The number “0” was evidently altered to make it look like a letter C. Then still later, another
supposedly original version came up. It has the date “December 29, 1896”. This time, the “0”
became a “6”.

So which is which?

Those who strongly believed the faking of the Rizal retraction document reported that the
forger of Rizal’s signature was Roman Roque, the man who also forged the signature of Urbano
Lacuna, which was used to capture Aguinaldo. The mastermind, they say, in both Lacuna’s and
Rizal’s signature forging was Lazaro Segovia. They were approached by Spanish friars during the
final day of the Filipino-American war to forge Rizal’s signature.

This story was revealed by Antonio K. Abad, who heard the tale from Roman Roque himself,
them being neighbours.

To this day, the retraction issue is still raging like a wild fire in the forest of the night.

Others would like to believe that the purported retraction of Rizal was invented by the friars
to deflect the heroism of Rizal which was centered on the friar abuses.
 Incidentally, Fr. Pio Pi, who copied verbatim Rizal’s retraction, also figured prominently
during the revolution. It was him, Andres Bonifacio reported, who had intimated to Aguinaldo the
cessation of agitation in exchange of pardon.

There are also not a few people who believe that the autobiography of Josephine Bracken,
written on February 22, 1897 is also forged and forged badly. The document supposedly written by
Josephine herself supported the fact that they were married under the Catholic rites. But upon
closer look, there is a glaring difference between the penmanship of the document, and other
letters written by Josephine to Rizal.

Surely, we must put the question of retraction to rest, though Rizal is a hero, whether he
retracted or not, we must investigate if he really did a turn-around. If he did not, and the
documents were forgeries, then somebody has to pay for trying to deceive a nation.

WEEK 10:
Excerpt from “Notes on the “Cry” of August 1896”

By: Jim Richardson

Pasya, Pagpupunit, at Unang Labanan

The debate has long been clouded by a lack of consensus on precisely what is meant by
the “Cry.” The term has been applied to three related but distinct events —

the “pasya” – the decision to revolt;

the “pagpupunit” – the tearing of cedulas; and

the “unang labanan” – the first encounter with Spanish forces.

To state the obvious, these three events did not all happen at the same time and place.
When and where the “Cry” should be commemorated thus depends on how it is defined.

Many of the older sources on the “Cry” do not precisely say which event they mean, and
often we can only guess. This problem is so embedded in the literature that it is impossible to
eradicate. Still, wherever practicable, these notes will avoid the fluid, contested “Cry” word and
seek instead to specify which particular event is being discussed – the pasya, the pagpupunit or
the unang labanan.

Among the historians who have studied the “Cry” in greatest detail, there is a sharp
divergence of opinion as to how the term should be defined.

Teodoro A. Agoncillo equates the term with the pagpupunit, which he says happened
immediately after the pasya.
Isagani R. Medina also takes the “Cry” to mean the pagpupunit, but says it happened before the
decision to revolt had been taken.

Soledad Borromeo-Buehler takes the view – the traditional view that KKK veterans took, she
says - that the “Cry” should mean the unang labanan.

It was the unang labanan, as Borromeo-Buehler points out, that was commemorated by the
first monument of the events of August 1896. The main inscription on the plinth read “Homenaje
del Pueblo Filipino a los Heroes de ’96 /Ala-alang sa Bayang Pilipino sa mga Bayani ng ‘96”,
and a smaller plaque bore the date “26 Agosto 1896”.

Unveiled before a huge cheering crowd in September 1911, the statue was erected in
Balintawak, the largest and best-known barrio in the general area where the Katipuneros had
congregated in August 1896. The name Balintawak was often used as shorthand to denote that
general area and the “Cry” had become popularly known as the “Cry of Balintawak” even before
the monument was erected.

Nobody professed in 1911, though, that the statue marked the “exact spot” where the first
battle had been fought. It was simply in Balintawak, on a plot donated by a local landowner,
Tomas Arguelles.

The documentary evidence on the unang labanan is reasonably clear. The first battle, an
encounter with a detachment of the Guardia Civil, was fought on the date inscribed on the
Balintawak monument - August 26 – at a place about five kilometers north-east of Balintawak,
between the settlements of Banlat and Pasong Tamo. A few sources give the date as August 25
but, as both Borromeo-Buehler and Encarnacion have shown, the most solid, contemporary
sources confirm August 26 to be correct.

The Balintawak monument continued to be the focus of the yearly “Cry” celebrations, held
on August 26, for decades. In the 1960s, however, the official definition of the “Cry” changed.
Officially, the “Cry” ceased to mean the unang labanan and was defined instead as “that part of
the Revolution when the Katipunan decided to launch a revolution against Spain. This event
culminated with the tearing of the cedula”. This definition, which is more or less in line with
Agoncillo’s, thus embraces both the pasya and pagpupunit, but excludes the unang labanan.

At first sight, the official definition looks clear and straightforward. A number of sources,
however, indicate that cedulas were torn on more than one occasion, in different places,
presumably because Katipuneros were arriving to join their embryonic army over the course of a
number of days, and many wanted to proclaim their rebellion, their commitment to fight Spanish
rule, in the same way. It is even possible (as Medina believes) that the main pagpupunit
preceded the pasya. But then it would have been premature, because the revolt might have
been deferred. It seems more likely, as the official definition of the “Cry” assumes, that the
largest, best remembered act of defiant cedula-tearing happened soon after the pasya had been
taken, and in the same vicinity.
Excerpt from “In Focus: Balintawak: The Cry for a Nationwide Revolution”

By: Milagros C. Guerrero, Emmanuel N. Encarnacion, and Ramon N. Villegas

Conflicting Accounts

Pio Valenzuela had several versions of the Cry. Only after they are compared and
reconciled with the other accounts will it be possible to determine what really happened.

Was there a meeting at Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896, after the meeting at Apolonio
Samson’s residence in Hong Kong? Where were the cedulas torn, at Kangkong or Pugad
Lawin?

In September 1896, Valenzuela stated before the Olive Court, which was charged with
investigating persons involved in the rebellion, only that Katipunan meetings took place from
Sunday to Tuesday or 23 to 25 August at Balintawak.

In 1911, Valenzuela averred that the Katipunan began meeting on 22 August while the Cry
took place on 23 August at Apolonio Samson’s house in Balintawak.

From 1928 to 1940, Valenzuela maintained that the Cry happened on 24 August at the
house of Tandang Sora (Melchora Aquino) in Pugad Lawin, which he now situated near Pasong
Tamo Road. A photograph of Bonifacio’s widow Gregoria de Jesus and Katipunan members
Valenzuela, Briccio Brigido Pantas, Alfonso and Cipriano Pacheco, published in La Opinion in
1928 and 1930, was captioned both times as having been taken at the site of the Cry on 24
August 1896 at the house of Tandang Sora at Pasong Tamo Road.

In 1935 Valenzuela, Pantas and Pacheco proclaimed “hindi sa Balintawak nangyari ang
unang sigaw ng paghihimagsik na kinalalagian ngayon ng bantayog, kung di sa pook na kilala
sa tawag na Pugad Lawin.” (The first Cry of the revolution did not happen in Balintawak where
the monument is, but in a place called Pugad Lawin.)

In 1940, a research team of the Philippines Historical Committee (a forerunner of the

National Historical Institute or NHI), which included Pio Valenzuela, identified the precise spot of
Pugad Lawin as part of Sitio Gulod, Banlat, Kalookan City. In 1964, the NHI’s Minutes of the
Katipunan referred to the place of the Cry as Tandang Sora’s and not as Juan Ramos’ house,
and the date as 23 August.

The NHI was obviously influenced by Valenzuela’s memoirs. In 1963, upon the NHI
endorsement, President Diosdado Macapagal ordered that the Cry be celebrated on 23 August
and that Pugad Lawin be recognized as its site.

Pio Valenzuela backtracked on yet another point. In 1896, he testified that when the
Katipunan consulted Jose Rizal on whether the time had come to revolt, Rizal was vehemently
against the revolution. Later, in Agoncillo’s Revolt of the masses, he then retracted and claimed
that Rizal was actually for the uprising, if certain prerequisites were met. Agoncillo reasoned that
Valenzuela had lied to save Rizal.

The Pugad Lawin Marker

The 1911 monument in Balintawak was later removed to a highway. Student groups moved
to save the discarded monument, and it was installed in front of Vinzons Hall in the Diliman
campus of the University of the Philippines on 29 November 1968.

In 1962, Teodoro Agoncillo, together with the UP Student Council, placed a marker at the
Pugad Lawin site. According to Agoncillo, the house of Juan Ramos stood there in 1896, while
the house of Tandang Sora was located at Pasong Tamo.

On 30 June 1983, Quezon City Mayor Adelina S. Rodriguez created the Pugad Lawin
Historical Committee to determine the location of Juan Ramos’s 1896 residence at Pugad
Lawin. The NHI files on the committee’s findings show the following:

In August 1983, Pugad Lawin in barangay Bahay Toro was inhabited by squatter colonies.

The NHI believed that it was correct in looking for the house of Juan Ramos and not of Tandang
Sora. However, the former residence of Juan Ramos was clearly defined.

There was an old dap-dap tree at the site when the NHI conducted its survey in 1983. Teodoro
Agoncillo, Gregorio Zaide and Pio Valenzuela do not mention a dap-dap tree in their books.

Pio Valenzuela, the main proponent of the “Pugad Lawin” version, was dead by the time the
committee conducted its research.

Teodoro Agoncillo tried to locate the marker installed in August 1962 by the UP Student Council.
However, was no longer extant in 1983.

In spite of the above findings and in the absence of any clear evidence, the NHI
disregarded its own 1964 report that the Philippine Historical Committee had determined in
1940 that the Pugad Lawin residence was Tandang Sora’s and not Juan Ramos’s and that the
specific site of Pugad Lawin was Gulod in Banlat.

The presence of the dap-dap tree in the Pugad Lawin site determined by Agoncillo and the
NHI is irrelevant, since none of the principals like Pio Valenzuela, Santiago Alvarez, and others,
nor historians like Zaide- and even Agoncillo himself before that instance- mentioned such a
tree.

On the basis of the 1983 committee’s findings, the NHI placed a marker on 23 August 1984
on Seminary Road in barangay Bahay Toro behind Toro Hills High School, the Quezon City
General Hospital and the San Jose Seminary. It reads:

Ang Sigaw ng Pugad Lawin (1896)

 Sa paligid ng pook na ito, si Andres Bonifacio at mga isang libong Katipunero at nagpulong
noong umaga ng ika-23 Agosto 1896, at ipinasyang maghimagsik laban sa Kastila sa Pilipinas.
Bilang patunay ay pinag-pupunit ang kanilang mga sedula na nagging tandang pagkaalipin ng
mga Pilpino. Ito ang kaunaunahang sigaw ng Bayang Api laban sa bansang Espanya na
pinatibayan sa pamamagitan ng paggamit ng sandata.

(On this site Andres Bonifacio and one thousand Katipuneros met in the morning of 23
August 1896 and decided to revolt against the Spanish colonial government in the Philippines.
As an affirmation of their resolve, they tore up their tax receipts which were symbols of
oppression of the Filipinos. This was the very first Cry of the Oppressed Nation against Spain
which was enforced with the use of arms.)

The place and name “Pugad Lawin,“ however, is problematic. In History of the Katipunan
(1939), Zaide records Valenzuela’s mention of the site in a footnote and not in the body of text,
suggesting that the historian regarded the matter as unresolved.

Cartographic changes

Was there a Pugad Lawin in maps or literature of the period?

A rough sketch or croquis de las operaciones practicadas in El Español showed the

movements of Lt. Ros against the Katipunan on 25, 26, and 27 August 1896. The map defined
each place name as sitio “Baclac” (sic: Banlat). In 1897, the Spanish historian Sastron
mentioned Kalookan, Balintawak, Banlat and Pasong Tamo. The names mentioned in some
revolutionary sources and interpretations- Daang Malalim, Kangkong and Pugad Lawin- were
not identified as barrios. Even detailed Spanish and American maps mark only Kalookan and
Balintawak.

In 1943 map of Manila marks Balintawak separately from Kalookan and Diliman. The sites
where revolutionary events took place are within the ambit of Balintawak. Government maps
issued in 1956, 1987, and 1990, confirm the existence of barangays Bahay Toro, but do not
define their boundaries. Pugad Lawin is not on any of these maps.

According to the government, Balintawak is no longer of Quezon City but has been
replaced by several barangays. Barrio Banlat is now divided into barangays Tandang Sora and
Pasong Tamo. Only Bahay Toro remains intact.

Writer and linguist Sofronio Calderon, conducting research in the late 1920s on the
toponym “Pugad Lawin,” went through the municipal records and the Census of 1903 and 1918,
but could not find the name. He concluded that “Isang…pagkakamali… ang sabihing mayroong
Pugad Lawin sa Kalookan.” (It would be a mistake to say that there is such as Pugad Lawin in
Kalookan.)

What can we conclude from all this, then?

First, that “Pugad Lawin” was never officially recognized as a place name on any Philippine
map before Second World War. Second, “Pugad Lawin” appeared in historiography only from
1928, or some 32 years after the events took place. And third, the revolution was always
traditionally held to have occurred in the area of Balintawak, which was a distinct from Kalookan
and Diliman.

Therefore, while the toponym “Pugad Lawin” is more romantic, it is more accurate to stick
to the original “Cry of Balintawak” (Guerrero, Encarnacion, & Villegas, 2003).

“Balintawak or Pugad Lawin?”

By: Ambeth Ocampo

Over two decades ago, the late National Artist Nick Joaquin, in his Inquirer column “Small
Beer,” argued repeatedly for a return to the traditional “Cry of Balintawak.” All our textbooks,
following a resolution from the National Historical Commission, state that the spark of the
Revolution started with a cry, followed by the tearing of cedulas led by Andres Bonifacio in
Pugad Lawin, Quezon City. The issue is not just historiographical but political. If the National
Historical Commission, upon review of the facts, reverses its earlier resolution and moves the
site of the “Cry” back to Balintawak then history will be moved from Quezon City to Caloocan.
Mayor Herbert Bautista’s loss will be Mayor Recom Echiverri’s gain.

Re-opening the issue might look simple since people think it’s just like tossing a coin to
decide between Balintawak or Pugad Lawin. If you bring two to three historians together, you
would not get a consensus.

To the above options, you must add other contenders to the historical site: Kangkong,
Bahay Toro, Pasong Tamo, Banlat and God know where else, depending on the primary source
being cited.

If you think location is the only issue, look again. The date declared by the National
Historical Commission as the start of the Philippine Revolution—Aug. 23, 1896—is but one date
proposed, the others being Aug. 20, 24, 25 and 26, 1896. And, if I remember from a historical
forum in UP, one scholar even insisted on a wildcard date of Sept. 5, 1896! All these debates on
dates and places, which may seem trivial to the general public, is the lifeblood of historians.

Teodoro A. Agoncillo said that Bonifacio scheduled a general assembly of the Katipunan
for Aug. 24, 1896, the Feast of San Bartolome, in Malabon. This date was chosen to enable
Katipuneros to pass security checkpoints carrying their bolos because Malabon is famous for
manufacturing a long-bladed weapon called “sangbartolome.” Bonifacio and his men were in
Balintawak on August 19. They left Balintawak for Kangkong on August 21, and on the
afternoon of August 22 they proceeded to Pugad Lawin. The next day, August 23, in the yard of
Juan Ramos — who apparently is the son of Melchora Aquino, the Katipuneros listened to the
rousing speech of Bonifacio, tore their cedulas, and vowed to fight.

Teodoro Agoncillo convinced the National Historical Commission to move the traditional
Aug. 26 date to Aug. 23 and transfer the historical site from Balintawak to Pugad Lawin. If
Agoncillo’s personality wasn’t enough for the Commission, he cited as his principal source Dr.
Pio Valenzuela, a close associate of Bonifacio.
 I wonder if other members of the commission bothered to remind Agoncillo that Valenzuela
may have been in Bonifacio’s inner circle, but may be unreliable as a primary source. In
Wenceslao Emilio’s five-volume compilation of historical documents, Archivo del Bibliofilo
Filipino, Valenzuela’s signed testimony before Spanish interrogators dated September 1896,
stated that the Cry of Balintawak was held in Balintawak on Aug. 26, 1896. Years later, in his
memoirs published in English after World War II, Valenzuela stated that the Cry was actually
held in Pugad Lawin on Aug. 23, 1896. Agoncillo explained that the September 1896 account
was extracted from Valenzuela under duress and couldn’t be trusted.

Balintawak was the place determined by tradition and many eyewitness accounts,
including Guillermo Masangkay who, in an interview in the Sunday Tribune in 1932, declared
the place as Balintawak and the date Aug. 26, 1896. Spanish Lt. Olegario Diaz in 1896
pinpointed the place as Balintawak but placed the date on Aug. 24, 1896.

Depending on your source, the dates and places do not seem to match. In 1928, Gregoria
“Oryang” de Jesus Nakpil, widow of Andres Bonifacio, wrote a short autobiography, entitled
“Mga tala ng aking buhay,” where she stated that the Cry of Balintawak took place on Aug. 25,
1896 in Pasong Tamo! This place isn’t in Makati but in Caloocan. How more authoritative can
you get than the Supremo’s widow? Oryang was revered as the muse, the Lakambini of the
Katipunan.

To complicate things further, another Bonifacio associate and composer of the Katipunan,
Julio Nakpil, second husband of Gregoria de Jesus, deposited his handwritten notes on the
Philippine Revolution in the National Library under Teodoro M. Kalaw in 1925. Here he wrote,
“Swearing before God and before history that everything in these notes is the truth”: “The
revolution started in Balintawak in the last days of August 1896.” On another page he wrote,
“Bonifacio uttered the first cry of war against tyranny on Aug. 24, 1896.” Finally, he remembered
that “the first cry of Balintawak was in Aug. 26, 1896 in the place called Kangkong, adjacent to
Pasong Tamo, within the jurisdiction of Balintawak, Caloocan, then within the province of
Manila.”

Now, which of these three declarations do we choose? Last but not least, we have
Santiago Alvarez whose memoirs identified the place as Bahay Toro and the date as Aug. 25,
1896. There are more conflicting sources available, so to keep the peace, and until more
conclusive evidence can be presented, let’s just stick to Pugad Lawin and Aug. 23, 1896
(Ocampo, 2010).
WEEK 11:
Agrarian Reform History written by the Department of Agrarian Reform

Pre-Hispanic Period

“This land is ours; God gave this land to us.”

Before the Spaniards came to the Philippines, Filipinos lived in villages or barangays ruled
by chiefs or datus. The datus comprised the nobility, followed by the timawa (freemen), aliping
namamahay (serfs), and aliping saguiguilid (slaves).

However, despite the existence of different classes in the social structure, everyone had
access to the fruits of the soil. Money was unknown, and rice served as the medium of
exchange.

Spanish Colonial Period

“United we stand, divided we fall.”

When the Spaniards came to the Philippines, the concept of encomienda (royal land
grants) was introduced. This system grants that encomienderos must defend his encomienda
from external attack, maintain peace and order within, and support the missionaries. In turn, the
encomiendero acquired the right to collect tribute from the Indios (natives).

The system, however, degenerated into the abuse of power by the encomienderos. The
tribute soon became land rents to a few powerful landlords, and the natives who once cultivated
the lands in freedom were transformed into mere share tenants.

The First Philippine Republic

“The yoke has finally broken.”

When the First Philippine Republic was established in 1899, Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo
declared in the Malolos Constitution his intention to confiscate large estates, especially the
so-called friar lands.

However, as the Republic was short-lived, Aguinaldo’s plan was never implemented.

American Colonial Period

“Long live America!”

Significant legislation enacted during the American Period:

● Philippine Bill of 1902 – set the ceilings on the hectare private individuals and
corporations may acquire, that is, 16 hectares for private individuals and 1,024
hectares for corporations.
● Land Registration Act of 1902 (Act No. 496) – provided a comprehensive registration
of land titles under the Torrens system.
● Public Land Act of 1903 – introduced the homestead system in the Philippines.
 ● Tenancy Act of 1933 (Act No. 4054 and 4113) – regulated relationships between
landowners and tenants of rice (50-50 sharing) and sugar cane lands.
● The Torrens system, which the Americans instituted for the registration of lands, did
not solve the problem completely. Either they were not aware of the law, or if they
did, they could not pay the survey cost and other fees required in applying for a
Torrens title.

Commonwealth Period

“Government for the Filipinos”

Manuel L. Quezon adopted the “Social Justice” program to arrest the increasing social
unrest in Central Luzon.

Significant legislation enacted during the Commonwealth Period:

● 1935 Constitution – “The promotion of social justice to ensure the well-being and
economic security of all people should be the concern of the State.”
● Commonwealth Act No. 178 (An Amendment to Rice Tenancy Act No. 4045), Nov.
13, 1936 – provided certain controls in the landlord-tenant relationships
● National Rice and Corn Corporation, 1936 – established the price of rice and corn,
thereby helping poor tenants and consumers.
● Commonwealth Act. No. 461, 1937 – specified reasons for the dismissal of tenants
and only with the approval of the Tenancy Division of the Department of Justice.
● Rural Program Administration, created on March 2, 1939 – provided the purchase
and lease of haciendas and their sale and lease to the tenants.
● Commonwealth Act No. 441, enacted on June 3, 1939 – created the National
Settlement Administration with a capital stock of P20,000,000.

Japanese Occupation

“The Era of Hukbalahap”

Upon the arrival of the Japanese in the Philippines in 1942, peasants’ and workers’
organizations grew in strength. Many peasants took up arms and identified themselves with the
anti-Japanese group, the HUKBALAHAP (Hukbong Bayan Laban sa Hapon).

World War II started in Europe in 1939 and the Pacific in 1941. The Hukbalahap controlled
the entire Central Luzon; landlords who supported the Japanese lost their lands to peasants,
while those who supported the Huks earned fixed rentals in favor of the tenants. Unfortunately,
the end of the war also signaled the end of gains acquired by the peasants.

Philippine Republic

“The New Republic”

 After the establishment of the Philippine Independence in 1946, the problems of land
tenure remained. These became worst in certain areas. Thus, the Congress of the Philippines
revised the tenancy law.

Manuel A. Roxas (1946–1948) enacted the following laws:

● Republic Act (RA) No. 34 – established the 70-30 sharing arrangements and
regulating shared tenancy contracts.
● RA No. 55 – provided for a more effective safeguard against arbitrary ejectment of
tenants.

Elpidio R. Quirino (1948–1953) enacted the following law:

Executive Order No. 355 issued on October 23, 1950 – replaced the National Land
Settlement Administration with Land Settlement Development Corporation, which took over the
responsibilities of the Agricultural Machinery Equipment Corporation and the Rice and Corn
Production Administration.

Ramon Magsaysay (1953–1957) enacted the following laws:

● RA No. 1160 of 1954 – abolished the LASEDECO and established the National
Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration to resettle dissidents and landless
farmers. It was particularly aimed at rebel returnees providing home lots and
farmlands in Palawan and Mindanao.
● RA No. 1199 (Agricultural Tenancy Act of 1954) – governed the relationship between
landowners and tenant farmers by organizing a shared tenancy and leasehold
system. The law provided the security of tenure of tenants. It also created the Court
of Agrarian Relations.
● RA No. 1400 (Land Reform Act of 1955) – created the Land Tenure Administration,
which was responsible for the acquisition and distribution of large tenanted rice and
corn lands over 200 hectares for individuals and 600 hectares for corporations.
● RA No. 821 (Creation of Agricultural Credit Cooperative Financing Administration) —
provided small farmers and share tenants’ loans with low-interest rates of 6%–8%.

Carlos P. Garcia (1957–1961)

He continued the program of President Ramon Magsaysay. No new legislation was passed
during his time.

Diosdado P. Macapagal (1961–1965) enacted the following law:

RA No. 3844 of August 8, 1963 (Agricultural Land Reform Code) – abolished shared
tenancy, institutionalized leasehold; set retention limit at 75 hectares; invested rights of
pre-emption and redemption for tenant farmers; provided administrative machinery for
implementation, institutionalized a judicial system of agrarian cases; and incorporated
extension, marketing, and supervised credit system of services of farmer-beneficiaries.

The RA was hailed as one that would emancipate Filipino farmers from the bondage of
tenancy.

Ferdinand E. Marcos (1965–1986)

Proclamation No. 1081, enacted on September 21, 1972, ushered the Period of the New
Society. Five days after the proclamation of Martial Law, the entire country was proclaimed a
land reform area, and simultaneously the Agrarian Reform Program was decreed.

President Corazon C. Aquino enacted the following laws:

● Executive Order No. 228, enacted on July 16, 1987 – declared full ownership to
qualified farmer-beneficiaries covered by PD 27. It also determined the value
remaining unvalued rice and corn lands subject of PD 27 and provided for the
manner of payment by the FBs and mode of compensation to landowners.
● Executive Order No. 229, enacted on July 22, 1987 – provided a mechanism for the
implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).
● Proclamation No. 131, enacted on July 22, 1987 – instituted the CARP as a major
program of the government. It provided for a special fund known as the Agrarian
Reform Fund, with an initial amount of Php50 billion to cover the estimated cost of
the program from 1987 to 1992.
● Executive Order No. 129-A, enacted on July 26, 1987 – streamlined and expanded
the power and operations of the DAR.
● RA No. 6657, enacted on June 10, 1988 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) –
an act that became effective on June 15, 1988, that instituted a comprehensive
agrarian reform program to promote social justice and industrialization, thereby
providing the mechanism for its implementation and other purposes. This law is still
the one being implemented at present.
● Executive Order No. 405, enacted on June 14, 1990 – vested in the Land Bank of
the Philippines the responsibility to determine land valuation and compensation for
all lands covered by CARP.
● Executive Order No. 407, enacted on June 14, 1990 – Accelerated the acquisition
and distribution of agricultural lands, pasture lands, fishponds, agroforestry lands,
and other lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture.

Fidel V. Ramos (1992–1998)

When President Fidel V. Ramos formally took over in 1992, his administration came
face-to-face with the public who had lost confidence in the agrarian reform program. His
administration committed to the vision “Fairer, faster and more meaningful implementation of the
Agrarian Reform Program.”

President Fidel V. Ramos enacted the following laws:

 ● RA No. 7881, 1995 – amended certain provisions of RA 6657 and exempted
fishponds and prawns from the coverage of CARP.
● RA No. 7905, 1995 – strengthened the implementation of the CARP.
● Executive Order No. 363, 1997 – limited the type of lands that may be converted by
setting conditions under which specific categories of agricultural land were either
absolutely non-negotiable for conversion or highly restricted for conversion.
● RA No. 8435, 1997 (Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act AFMA) – plugged
the legal loopholes in land use conversion.
● RA 8532, 1998 (Agrarian Reform Fund Bill) – provided an additional Php50 billion for
CARP and extended its implementation for another 10 years.

Joseph E. Estrada (1998–2000)

“ERAP PARA SA MAHIRAP.” This was the battle cry that endeared President Joseph
Estrada and made him popular during the 1998 presidential election.

President Joseph E. Estrada enacted the following law:

● Executive Order N0. 151, September 1999 (Farmer’s Trust Fund) – allowed the
voluntary consolidation of small farm operation into medium- and large-scale
integrated enterprises that could access long-term capital.
● During his administration, President Estrada launched the Magkabalikat Para sa
Kaunlarang Agraryo or MAGKASAKA. The DAR forged into joint ventures with
private investors in the agrarian sector to make FBs competitive.
● However, the Estrada administration was short-lived. The masses who put him into
office demanded his ouster.

Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (2000–2010)

● The Agrarian reform program under the Arroyo administration was anchored on the
vision “To make the countryside economically viable for the Filipino family by building
partnership and promoting social equity and new economic opportunities towards
lasting peace and sustainable rural development.”
● Land Tenure Improvement (LTI) – DAR would remain vigorous in implementing the
land acquisition and distribution component of CARP. The DAR would improve the
land tenure system through land distribution and leasehold.
● Provision of Support Services – CARP not only involved the distribution of lands but
also included a package of support services, such as credit assistance, extension
services, irrigation facilities, roads and bridges, marketing facilities, and training and
technical support programs.
● Infrastructure Projects – DAR would transform the Agrarian reform communities
(ARCs), which focused and integrated the delivery of support services into rural
economic zones that would help create job opportunities in the countryside.
 ● KALAHI ARZone – The KALAHI Agrarian Reform zones were also launched. These
zones consisted of one or more municipalities with the concentration of the ARC
population to achieve greater agro productivity.
● Agrarian Justice – To help clear the backlog of agrarian cases, DAR would hire more
paralegal officers to support undermanned adjudicatory boards and introduce a
quota system to compel adjudicators to work faster on agrarian reform cases. DAR
would respect the rights of both farmers and landowners.

Benigno Aquino III (2010–2016)

● President Benigno Aquino III vowed during his 2012 State of the Nation Address that
he would complete CARP, which is the centerpiece program of the administration of
his mother, President Corazon Aquino, before the end of his term.
● The younger Aquino distributed their family-owned Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac. Apart
from the said farm lots, he also promised to complete the distribution of privately
owned lands of productive agricultural estates in the country that have escaped the
program's coverage.
● Under his administration, the Agrarian Reform Community Connectivity and
Economic Support Services project was created to contribute to the overall goal of
rural poverty reduction, especially in agrarian reform areas.
● Agrarian Production Credit Program provided credit support for crop production to
newly organized and existing agrarian reform beneficiary (ARB)’ organizations and
farmers’ organizations not qualified to avail themselves of loans under the regular
credit windows of banks.
● The legal case monitoring system, which is a web-based legal system for recording
and monitoring various kinds of agrarian cases at the provincial, regional, and central
offices of the DAR to ensure faster resolution and close monitoring of
agrarian-related cases, was also launched.
● In addition to these initiatives, Aquino also enacted Executive Order No. 26, Series
of 2011, to mandate the Department of Agriculture-Department of Environment and
Natural Resources-Department of Agrarian Reform Convergence Initiative to
develop a National Greening Program in cooperation with other government
agencies.

Rodrigo Roa Duterte (2016–present)

● Under his leadership, the President wanted to pursue an “aggressive” land reform
program that would help alleviate the life of poor Filipino farmers by prioritizing the
provision of support services alongside land distribution.
● The President directed the DAR to launch the 2nd phase of agrarian reform where
landless farmers would be awarded undistributed lands under the CARP.
● Duterte planned to place almost all public lands, including military reserves, under
agrarian reform.
 ● The President also placed 400 hectares of agricultural lands in Boracay under
CARP.
● Under his administration, the DAR created an anti-corruption task force to investigate
and handle reports on alleged anomalous activities by officials and employees of the
department.

The Department also pursued an “Oplan Zero Backlog” in the resolution of cases with
Agrarian reform in Agrarian reform in agrarian justice delivery of the agrarian reform program to
fast-track the implementation of CARP (Department of Agrarian Reform [DAR], n.d.).

CARP or Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program

Implementation of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines

The implementation of Agrarian Reforms proceeded at a slow pace due to a lack of

political will. Redistribution of the land was also slow (A Status on the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program in the Philippines, n.d.).

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law: Philippines

The RA No. 6657, alternatively called the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, was
signed by Former President Corazon C. Aquino on June 10, 1988. The Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law was responsible for the implementation of the CARP in the Philippines.
The law focused on industrialization in the Philippines together with social justice.

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law: Objectives

The main objective of instituting the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law was to
successfully devise land reform in the Philippines (A Status on the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program in the Philippines, n.d.). It was President Arroyo who signed the Executive
Order No. 456 on August 23 to rename the Department of Land Reform to the Department of
Agrarian Reform. This had been done in order to expand the functional area of the law. In
addition to land reform, the Department of Agrarian Reform began to supervise other allied
activities to improve the beneficiaries' economic and social status in the Philippines
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform, 2016).

The CARP is a Philippine state policy that ensures and promotes welfare to landless
farmers and farm workers and elevates social justice and equity among rural areas (A Status on
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program in the Philippines, n.d.).

Department of Agrarian Reform

Mandate and Functions

● To lead in implementing the CARP through TI, agrarian justice, and coordinated
delivery of essential support services to client beneficiaries.
● To provide land tenure security to landless farmers through land acquisition and
distribution, leasehold arrangements’ implementation, and other LTI services.
● To provide legal intervention to ARBs through the adjudication of agrarian cases and
legal assistance;
 ● To implement, facilitate, and coordinate the delivery of support services to ARBs
through Social Infrastructure and Local Capability Building, Sustainable
Agribusiness, and Rural Enterprise Development, and Access Facilitation and
Enhancement Services.

(DAR, n.d.)

Mission Statement

DAR is the lead government agency that holds and implements comprehensive and genuine
agrarian reform, which actualizes equitable land distribution, ownership, agricultural productivity,
and tenurial security for, of, and with the tillers of the land towards the improvement of their
quality of life (DAR, n.d.).

Vision

A just, safe and equitable society that upholds the rights of tillers to own, control, secure,
cultivate, and enhance their agricultural lands, improve their quality of life toward rural
development and national industrialization (DAR, n.d.)

The logo shows the department's acronym representing the institution and its role as the
lead agency in the implementation of CARP.

The sun radiates its light into the field of green divided into 12 segments representing the
original 12 regions covered by the program. Green stands for fertility and productivity, while
yellow represents hope and a golden harvest of ARBs who are the recipients of the services
provided by the department via CARP. Both colors imply the economic growth and sound rural
development can be achieved through agrarian reform (Department of Agrarian Reform, n.d.).

The Logo