Module 4: The Declaration of Phil.

Independence & Malolos Constitution;

Political Caricatures of American Era
In the preceding lessons, we have discussed some primary sources from two different historical
periods, the pre-colonial and Spanish colonial periods. For this week, we will analyze the
historical content and context of primary sources during the post-Spanish period, focusing on
the birth of Philippine Independence and the first Philippine Republic.
The Spanish regime lasted for about three hundred thirty-three years, that was considered the
longest regime in Philippine History. The Filipino revolutionary forces under Gen. Emilio
Aguinaldo proclaimed the sovereignty and independence of the Philippine islands from Spanish
colonization in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898. Then on January 23, 1899, the First Philippine
Republic was inaugurated after the promulgation of the Malolos Constitution.

A. 1898 DECLARATION OF PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE

by: Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista
Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista (17 December 1830 – 4 December 1903), also known as Don
Bosyong, was a lawyer and author of the Declaration of Philippine Independence document. A
distant relative of the Rizal family, Philippine national hero José Rizal always sought his advice
during his school days in Manila.
Bautista solicited funds to finance the campaign for the reforms in the Philippines. He then
became a member of the La Liga Filipina, Cuerpo de Compromisarios, and La Propaganda. In
1896, the Spaniards arrested and imprisoned him at Fort Santiago, as he was suspected for
being involved in the Philippine Revolution. He defended himself and was later released from
prison. He became the first adviser of President Emilio Aguinaldo in 1898, and subsequently
wrote the Declaration of Philippine Independence. On 14 July 1899, Bautista was elected vice-
president of Tarlac's Revolutionary Congress. He was later appointed judge of the Court of First
Instance of Pangasinan.
The Act of Declaration of Philippine Independence was written and was read by Ambrosio
Rianzares Bautista in Spanish and translated by Sulpicio Guevara. It was written to use for the
declaration of freedom of the Philippines after the war against America and Spain. The
declaration was signed by 98 persons and at the end of it, emphasizing an American present in
there with no official role. It is said that there are American army officer who witnessed. The
main reason for having the declaration is to symbolize that Philippines has the right to be
independent and free from the Spaniards and is no longer tied politically with them.
With a government in operation. Aguinaldo thought that it was necessary to declare the
independence of the Philippines. He believed that such a more would inspire the people to fight
more eagerly against the Spaniards and at the same time, lead the foreign countries to recognize
the independence of the country. Mabini, who had by now been made Aguinaldo’s unofficial
adviser, objected. He based his objection on the fact that it was more important to reorganize
the government in such a manner as to convince the foreign powers of the competence and
stability of the new government than to proclaim Philippine independence at such an early
period. Aguinaldo, however, stood his ground and won.
On June 12, between four and five in the afternoon, Aguinaldo, in the presence of a huge
crowd, proclaimed the independence of the Philippines at Cavite el Viejo (Kawit). For the first
time, the Philippine National Flag, made in Hongkong by Mrs. Marcela Agoncillo, assisted by
Lorenza Agoncillo and Delfina Herboza, was officially hoisted and the Philippine National
March played in public. The Act of the Declaration of Independence was prepared by Ambrosio
Rianzares Bautista, who also read it. A passage in the Declaration reminds one of another
passage in the American Declaration of Independence. The Philippine Declaration was signed
by ninety-eight persons, among them an American army officer who witnessed the
proclamation. The proclamation of Philippine independence was, however, promulgated on
August 1 when many towns has already been organized under the rules laid down by the
Dictatorial Government.
Every year, the country commemorates the anniversary of the Philippine Independence
proclaimed on 12 June 1898, in the province of Cavite. Indeed, such event is a significant
turning point in the history of the country because it signaled the end of the 333 years of
Spanish colonization. There have been numerous studies done on the events leading to the
independence of the country but very few students had the chance to read the actual document
of the declaration. This is in spite of the historical importance of the document and the details
that the document reveals on the rationale and circumstances of that historical day in Cavite.
Interestingly, reading the details of the said document in hindsight is telling of the kind of
government that was created under Aguinaldo, and the forthcoming hand of the United States of
America in the next few years of the newly created republic. The declaration was a short 2,000-
word document, which summarized the reason behind the revolution against Spain, the war for
independence, and the future of the new republic under Emilio Aguinaldo.
The proclamation commenced with a characterization of the conditions in the Philippines
during the Spanish colonial period. The document specifically mentioned abuses and
inequalities in the colony. The declaration says:
"...taking into consideration, that their inhabitants being already weary of bearing the ominous
yoke of Spanish domination, on account of the arbitrary arrests and harsh treatment practiced by
the Civil Guard to the extent of causing death with the connivance and even with the express
orders of their commanders, who sometimes went to the extreme of ordering the shooting of
prisoners under the pretext that they were attempting to escape, in violation of the provisions of
the Regulations of their Corps, which abuses were unpunished and on account of the unjust
deportations, especially those decreed by General Blanco, of eminent personages and of high
social position, at the instigation of the Archbishop and friars interested in keeping them out of
the way for their own selfish and avaricious purpose, deportations which are quickly brought
about. By a method of procedure more execrable than that of the inquisition and which every
civilized nation rejects on account or a decision being rendered without a hearing of the persons
accused."
The above passage demonstrates the justifications behind the revolution against Spain.
Specifically cited are the abuse by the Civil Guards and the unlawful shooting of prisoners
whom they alleged as attempting to escape. The passage also condemns the unequal protection
of the law between the Filipino people and the "eminent personages." Moreover, the line
mentions the avarice and greed of the clergy like the friars and the Archbishop himself. Lastly,
the passage also condemns what they saw as the unjust deportation and rendering of other
decision without proper hearing, expected of any civilized nation.
From here, the proclamation proceeded with a brief historical overview of the Spanish
occupation since Magellan's arrival in Visayas until the Philippine Revolution, with specific
details about the latter, especially after the Pact of Biak-na-Bato had collapsed. The document
narrates the spread of the movement "like an electric spark" through different towns and
provinces like Bataan, Pampanga, Batangas, Bulacan, Laguna, and Morong, and the quick
decline of Spanish forces in the same provinces. The revolt also reached Visayas; thus, the
independence of the country was ensured. The document also mentions Rizal's execution,
calling it unjust. The execution, as written in the document, was done to "please the greedy
body of friars in their insatiable desire to seek revenge upon and exterminate all those who are
opposed to their Machiavellian purposes, which tramples upon the penal code prescribed for
these islands." The document also narrates the Cavite Mutiny of January 1872 that caused the
infamous execution of the martyred native priests Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto
Zamora, "whose innocent blood was shed through the intrigues of those so-called religious
orders" that incited the three secular priests in the said mutiny.
The proclamation of independence also invokes that the established republic would be led under
the dictatorship of Emilio Aguinaldo. The first mention was at the very beginning of the
proclamation. It stated:
"In the town of Cavite Viejo, in this province of Cavite, on the twelfth day of June eighteen
hundred and ninety-eight, before me, Don Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista, Auditor of War and
Special Commissioner appointed to proclaim solemnize this act by the Dictatorial Government
of these Philippine islands, for the purposes and by virtue of the circular addressed by the
Eminent Dictator of the same Don Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy."
The same was repeated toward the last part of the proclamation. It states:
"We acknowledge, approve and confirm together with the orders that have been issued
therefrom. the Dictatorship established by Don Emilio Aguinaldo whom we honor as the
Supreme Chief of this Nation, which this day commences to have a life of its own, in the belief'
that the is the instrument selected by God in spite of his humble origin, to effect the redemption
of this unfortunate people, as foretold by Doctor Jose Rizal in the magnificent verses which he
composed when he was preparing to be shot, liberating them from the yoke of Spanish
domination in punishment of the impunity with which their Government allowed the
commission of abuses by its subordinates."
Another detail in the proclamation that is worth looking at is its explanation on the Philippine
flag that was first waved on the same day. The document explained:
"And finally, it was unanimously resolved that, this
Nation, independent from this clay, must use the
same flag used heretofore, whose design and colors
and described in the accompanying drawing, with
design representing in natural colors the three arms
referred to. The white triangle represents the
distinctive emblem of the famous Katipunan Society,
which by means of its compact of blood urged on the
masses of the people to insurrection; the three stars
represent the three principal Islands of this
Archipelago, Luzon, Mindanao and Panay, in which
this insurrectionary movement broke out; the sun
represents the gigantic strides that have been made
by the sons of this land on the road of progress and
civilization, its eight rays symbolizing the eight
provinces of Manila. Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga,
Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna and Batangas, which
were declared in a state of war almost as soon as the first insurrectionary movement was
initiated; and the colors blue, red and white, commemorate those of the flag of the United States
of North America, in manifestation of our profound gratitude towards that Great Nation for the
disinterested protection she is extending to us and will continue to extend to us."
This often-overlooked detail reveals much about the historically accurate meaning behind the
most widely known national symbol in the Philippines. It is not known by many for example,
that the white triangle was derived from the symbol of the Katipunan. The red and blue colors
of the flag are often associated with courage and peace, respectively. Our basic education omits
the fact that those colors were taken from the flag of the United States. While it can always be
argued that symbolic meaning can always change and be reinterpreted, the original symbolic
meaning of something presents us several historical truths that can explain the subsequent
events, which unfolded after the declaration of independence on the 12th day of June 1898.
B. THE MALOLOS CONSTITUTION AND THE FIRST
PHILIPPINE REPUBLIC
by: Felipe G. Calderon
Felipe Gonzales Calderon, known as the 'Father of the Malolos Constitution", was born on
April 4, 1868 in Santa Cruz de Malabon now Tanza), Cavite, to a Spanish nobleman, Don Jose
Gonzales Calderon, and Doña Manuela Roca who was of Spanish-Filipino blood. Calderon was
the author of the Malolos Constitution, which was enacted on January 20, 1899 by the Malolos
Congress that established the First Philippine Republic. The original was written in Spanish,
which became the first official language of the Philippines.
Notably, Calderon established two law universities -- Liceo de Manila, the first law college in
the Philippines, and the Escuela de Derecho (School of Duties). He taught in both institutions.
In 1904, he was appointed member of a commission to draft a proposed Penal Code. He also
organized the La Proteccion de la Infancia (The Protection of Infants) that established a
humanitarian institution to protect and care for disadvantaged children. His Encyclopedia
Filipinas was published in 1908.
He died on July 6, 1908 at the age of 40.
After returning to the islands. Aguinaldo wasted little time in setting up an independent
government. On June 12, 1898, a declaration of independence modeled on the American one,
was proclaimed at his headquarters in Cavite. It was at this time that Apolinario Mabini. a law,
and political thinker, came to prominence as Aguinaldo’s principal adviser. Born into a poor
indio family but educated at the University of Santo Tomas, he advocated "simultaneous
external and internal revolution," a philosophy that unsettled the more conservative landowners
and ilustrados who initially supported Aguinaldo. For Mabini, true independence for the
Philippines would mean not simply liberation from Spain (or from any other colonial power)
but also educating the people for self-government and abandoning, the paternalistic, colonial
mentality that the Spanish had cultivated over the centuries. Mabini's The True Decalogue,
published in July 1898 in the form of ten commandments, used this medium, somewhat
paradoxically, to promote critical thinking and a reform of customs and attitudes. His
Constitutional Program for the Philippine Republic, published at the same time, elaborated his
ideas on political institutions.
On September 15,1898, a revolutionary congress was convened at Malolos, a market town
located thirty-two kilometer north of Manila, for the purpose of drawing up a constitution for
the new republic. A document was approved by the congress on November 2,1898. Modeled on
the constitution of France, Belgium, and Latin American countries, it was promulgated at
Malolos on January 21, 1899, and two days later Aguinaldo was inaugurated as president.
American observers traveling in Luzon commented that the areas controlled by the republic
seemed peaceful and well governed. The Malolos congress had set up schools, a military
academy, and the Literary University of the Philippines. Government finances were organized,
and new currency was issued. The army and navy were established on a regular basis. having
regional commands. The accomplishments of the Filipino government, however, counted for
little in the eyes of the great powers as the transfer of the islands from Spanish to United States
rule was arranged in the closing months of 1898.
The Treaty of Paris aroused anger among Filipinos. Reacting to the US$20 million sum paid to
Spain, La Independencia (Independence), a newspaper published in Manila by a revolutionary.
General Antonio Luna, stated that "people are not to be bought and sold like horses and houses.
Upon the announcement of the treaty, the radicals, Mabini and Luna, prepared for war, and
provisional articles were added to the constitution giving President Aguinaldo dictatorial
powers in times of emergency. President William McKinley issued a proclamation on
December 21, 1898, declaring United States policy to be one of "Benevolent Assimilation" in
which "the mild sway of justice and right" would be substituted for "arbitrary rule." When this
was published in the islands on January 4, 1899, references to "American sovereignty" having
been prudently deleted, Aguinaldo issued his own proclamation that condemned "violent and
aggressive seizure" by the United States and threatened war.
Excerpts from the Malolos Constitution
Article 3. Sovereignty resides exclusively in the people.
Article 5. The State recognizes the freedom and equality of all religions, as well as the
separation of Church and State.
Article 19. No Filipino in the full enjoyment of his civil and political rights shall be hindered in
the free exercise of the same.
Article 20.1. Neither shall any Filipino be deprived of: The right of expressing freely his ideas
and opinions either by word or by writing, availing himself of the press or any other similar
means.
Article 20.2. Neither shall any Filipino be deprived of: The right of joining any association for
all the objects of human life which may not be contrary to public morals.
Article 23. Any Filipino can find and maintain establishments of instruction or of education, in
accordance with the regulations that may be established. Popular education shall be obligatory
and gratuitous in the schools of the nation.
Table of Titles
1. The Republic
2. The Government
3. Religion
4. The Filipinos and Their National and Individual Rights
5. The Legislative Power
6. The Permanent Commission
7. The Executive Power
8. The President of the Republic
9. The Secretaries of Government
10.The Judicial Power
11.Provincial and Popular Assemblies
12.Administration of the State
13.Amendment of the Constitution
14.Constitutional Observance, Oath, and Language
The Malolos constitution is the first important Filipino document ever produced by the people's
representatives. It is anchored in democratic traditions that ultimately had their roots in
American soil. It created a Filipino state whose government was "popular, representative and
responsible" with three distinct branches -- the executive, the legislative and the judicial. The
constitution specifically provided for safeguards against abuses and enumerated the national
and individual rights not only of the Filipinos and of the aliens.
The legislative powers were exercised by the Assembly of Representatives composed of
delegates elected according to law. To make the function of Congress continuous, the document
provided for a Permanent Commission which would sit as a law-making body when Congress
was not in session. The assembly elected the President of the Republic. The Cabinet, composed
of the Secretaries of the different Departments of the government, was responsible not to the
President, but to the Assembly. The administration of justice was vested in the Supreme Court
and in inferior courts to be established according to law. The Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court was to be elected by the Assembly with the concurrence of the President and the Cabinet.
The constitution as a whole is a monument to the capacity of the Filipinos to chart their own
course along democratic lines. In a period of storm and stress, it symbolized the ideals of a
people who had emerged from the Dark Ages into the Light of Reason.
The Malolos Republic
Owing to the objections of Mabini to some provisions in the Constitution, Aguinaldo did not
immediately promulgate it.
The leaders of Congress compromised by inserting some amendments. After promulgating the
Malolos Constitution, the Filipino leaders proceeded to inaugurate the first Filipino Republic on
January 23, 1899.
POLITICAL CARICATURES OF THE AMERICAN ERA
by: Alfred McCoy
In the second part our lesson, we will examine some political caricatures/cartoons, which is a
form of art that gained full expression during the American era. These cartoons were made by
Filipino artists to record national attitudes toward the coming of the Americans as well as the
changing mores and times in the Philippines.
Cartoons became an effective tool of publicizing opinions through heavy use of symbolism,
which is different from a verbose written editorial and opinion piece. The unique way that a
caricature represents opinion and captures the audience's imagination is reason enough for
historians to examine these political cartoons. Commentaries in mass media inevitably shape
public opinion and such kind of opinion is worthy of historical examination (Readings in
Philippine History, 2018).
Born on June 8,1945 in Concord, Massachusetts, United States, Dr. Alfred "Al” W. McCoy is a
Professor of SE Asian History at the University of Wisconsin at Madison where he also serves
as director of the Center for SE Asian Studies. He's spent the past quarter-century writing out
the politics and history of the optimum trade.
McCoy has spent the thirty years writing about Southeast Asian History and politics. His
publications include Philippine Cartoons (1985), Anarchy of families (1994), Closer Than
rothers: Manhood at the Philippine Military Academy (2000) and Lives at the Margin (2001).
After earning a Ph.D. in Southeast Asian history at Yale, the writings of McCoy on this region
has focused on two topics; Philippine Political History and Global Opium Trafficking. The
Philippines remains the major focus of his research. His teaching interests include; Modern
Philippine social and political history, U.S. foreign policy; Colonial empires in Southeast Asia;
illicit drug trafficking; and CIA covert operations.
POLITICAL CARICATURES
In his book Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era (1900-1944), Alfred
McCoy, together with Alfredo Roces, compiled political cartoons published in newspaper
dailies and periodicals in the aforementioned time period. For this part, we are going to look at
selected cartoons and explain the context of each one.

The first example shown was published in The Independent

on May 20, 1916. The cartoon shows a politician from
Tondo, named Dr. Santos, passing his crown to his brother-
in-law, Dr. Barcelona. A Filipino guy is depicted wearing
salakot and barong tagalog was trying to stop Santos, telling
the latter to stop giving Barcelona the crown because it is not
his to begin with.

The second cartoon was also published by The Independent

on 16 June 1917. This was drawn by Fernando Amorsolo and
was aimed as a commentary to the workings of Manila Police
at that period. Here, we see a Filipino child who stole a
skinny chicken because he had nothing to eat. The police
officer was relentlessly pursuing the said child. A man
wearing a salakot, labeled Juan de la Cruz was grabbing the
officer, telling him to leave the small-time pickpockets and
thieves and to turn at the great thieves instead. He was pointing to huge warehouses containing
bulks of rice, milk, and grocery products.

The third cartoon was a commentary on the unprecedented cases

of colorum automobiles in the city streets. The Philippine Free
Press published this commentary when fatal accidents involving
colorum vehicles and taxis occurred too often already.
 The fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up officer was at
the screen saying that couples are not allowed to neck or make
love in the theater. Two youngsters looked horrified while an
older couple seemed amused.

The next cartoon was published by The Independent on 27

November 1915. Here, we see the caricature of Uncle Sam
riding a chariot pulled by Filipinos wearing school uniforms.
The Filipino boys were carrying American objects like
baseball bats, whiskey, and boxing gloves. McCoy, in his
caption to the said cartoon, says that this cartoon was based on
an event in 1907 when William Howard Taft was brought to
the Manila pier riding a chariot pulled by students of Liceo de Manila. Such was condemned by
the nationalists at that time.

The last cartoon was published by Lipang Kalabaw on 24

August 1907. In the picture, we can see Uncle Sam rationing
porridge to the politicians and members of the Progresista
Party (sometimes known as the Federalista Party) while
members of the Nacionalista Party look on and wait for their
turn. This cartoon depicts the patronage of the United States
being coveted by politicians from either of the party.
Filipino Grievances Against Gov. Wood; Speech of Corazon Aquino
For this topic, we are going to study Filipino Grievances against Governor Wood which served
as impeachment request to the Governor. Although Governor Wood established improvements
in some areas, his personality caused strong antagonism between him and Filipino political
leaders. They feared that the autonomy gained from previous administration might be lost. The
struggles between Wood and Filipino leaders enhanced the nationalistic spirit of the people.
However, the crisis against his administration was eased shortly as Governor Wood died due
surgery failure in the United States.
Unlike other sources discussed from previous modules, this primary source was authored and
collaborated by two politicians, Jose Abad Santos and George Jacobo.

FILIPINO GRIEVANCES AGAINST GOVERNOR WOOD

by: Jose Abad Santos and Jorge Bacobo
Jose Abad Santos was born in San Fernando, Pampanga. He was a Pencionado and studied
law in Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. He was appointed Undersecretary of
Justice in 1921 but gave up the position at the height of the cabinet crisis in 1923. He served as
chief legal counsel of the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representative and
it was during this time when he joined the Anti-Wood campaign. He was appointed Associate
Justice of the Supreme Court in 1932 and became Chief Justice nine years later. On April 11,
1942, the Japanese army arrested him in Barili, Cebu and he was subsequently brought to
Mindanao. On May 7, 1942, he was executed in Malabang, Lanao in the presence of his son
Pepito.
Jorge Bocobo was born in Gerona, Tarlac on October 19, 1886. In 1907, he earned his
Bachelor of Law degree from Indiana University under the Pensionado program of the colonial
government. He was a close associate of Manuel L. Quezon and served as one of his speech
writers. He became president of the University of the Philippines from 1934 to 1939 and
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from 1942-1944. He died on July 23, 1965.
GOVERNOR LEONARD WOOD AND THE FILIPINOS
Governor Leonard Wood
After Woods replaced the highly popular Harrison on October 5, 1921, he vetoed 64 of 217 bills
passed by the Legislature compared to only five under Harrison. According to the Filipinos, the
bills were dismissed on the flimsiest motives. Wood for his part saw the vetoed bills as poorly
made or unconstitutional. The strictness of Wood was perceived as an affront to the newly
found liberties by Filipino leaders like Quezon. Wood was also aghast to learn that the
government was in a financial crisis and it was subsidizing losing corporations like the
Philippine National Bank, the Manila Railway Company, and Manila Coal Company which
became inefficient because of having too many employees, many of whom were recommended
by Filipino officials. Wood moved to streamline these corporations and make them self-
sufficient. The threat of removing officials placed there by patronage of Filipino officials made
Wood their personal enemy.
The point of confrontation between Wood and the Filipino officials led by Quezon came to the
fore with the Cabinet Crisis of 1923. This crisis was sparked over Wood’s order to reinstate an
American police detective named Ray Conley. Conley was the head of vice squad of the Manila
Police tasked with running after the operators of gambling and opium den and their patrons. He
was charged with accepting bribes from gambling den operators apparently as revenge by
criminal elements because of his efficient drive against them. The city mayor of Manila, Ramon
Fernandez, and the Secretary of Interior, Jose P. Laurel, believed in Conley’s guilt. The Court
of First Instance, however, found the evidence against Conley as insufficient and inconsistent,
and ordered the case against the detective dismissed. Wood ordered Conley reinstated but
Conley’s enemies wanted him charged administratively of keeping a mistress and having made
false statement that the mistress was his wife. Laurel tried to have Conley investigated
administratively but Wood objected saying that this would make Conley’s accusers his judges.
Wood himself encouraged the investigation of Conley on the charge of keeping a mistress and
making false statement. An independent Committee of Investigation was convened and it found
Conley not guilty of the charges. Wood then sent a memorandum to Laurel ordering Conley’s
reinstatement. Laurel transmitted a letter to Mayor Fernandez requesting compliance and then
tendered his resignation as Secretary of the Interior. Conley who was later reinstated, retired
with full benefits.
Filipino officials then accused Wood of meddling in the details of the local government which
should have been handled by the Filipinos. Quezon saw this incident as an opportunity to
embarrass Governor Wood by resigning form the Council of State. At the time, the ruling
Nacionalista party was facing the prospect of defeat in the 1923 elections. Quezon needed a
villain to fight and keep himself in power. Following Quezon’s resignation, Mayor of Manila,
Speaker of the House, Manuel Roxas, and all the Filipino Department Secretaries also resigned.
Wood accepted the mass resignation of the Filipino officials. Quezon, as President of the
Philippine senate, refused to confirm for his part, and refused to confirm all officials appointed
by Wood to replace the officials who resigned. The Cabinet Crisis plagued the rest of Wood’s
term until his death on August 7, 1927 while being operated on for a brain tumor.
THE PROTEST
"In the face of this critical situation, we, the constitutional representatives of the Filipino
people, met to deliberate upon the present difficulties existing in the Government of the
Philippine Islands and to determine how best to preserve the supremacy and majesty of the laws
and to safeguard the right and liberties of our people, having faith in the sense of justice of the
people of the United States and inspired by her patriotic example in the early days of her
history, do hereby, in our behalf and in the name of the Filipino people, solemnly and publicly
make known our most vigorous protest against the arbitrary acts and usurpations of the present
Governor-General of the Philippine Islands, particularly against Executive Order No.
SPEECH OF CORAZON AQUINO DURING THE JOINT SESSION OF
THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS
Philippines being in Martial Law under the leadership of Ferdinand Marcos experienced a lot of
brutality from the government. This urged Corazon Aquino to be a strong advocate for the
restoration of democratic country to bring back the power to Filipino people. To declare
freedom from Marcos regime, to mark a new beginning for Filipinos and to appeal financial
assistance to cope with all the adversities the Philippines is facing during her time were the
intentions of her speech. She also credited her husband Ninoy Aquino for conceptualizing
achieving peace through peaceful means in her speech. Corazon being the first female president
successfully restored civil rights and abolish 1973 constitution and made remarkable
contributions to the Philippines.
President Corazon C. Aquino was the 11th president and the first female president of the
Philippines. When President Ferdinand Marcos called for a snap election in 1986, she became
the opposition’s presidential candidate. When she narrowly lost the election, Aquino and her
supporters challenged the results. This resulted to the so-called EDSA revolution, prompting
Marcos to seek exile in Hawaii. On the 25th of February 1986, Aquino was sworn into office.
Speech of Her Excellency Corazon C. Aquino
President of the Philippines
During the Joint Session of the United States Congress
Three years ago, I left America in grief to even as the dictatorship demolished one by
bury my husband, Ninoy Aquino. I thought I one the institutions of democracy – the
had left it also to lay to rest his restless press, the Congress, the independence of the
dream of Philippine freedom. Today, I have judiciary, the protection of the Bill of Rights
returned as the president of a free people. – Ninoy kept their spirit alive in himself.
In burying Ninoy, a whole nation honored The government sought to break him by
him. By that brave and selfless act of giving indignities and terror. They locked him up in
honor, a nation in shame recovered its own. a tiny, nearly airless cell in a military camp
A country that had lost faith in its future in the north. They stripped him naked and
found it in a faithless and brazen act of held the threat of sudden midnight execution
murder. So in giving, we receive, in losing over his head. Ninoy held up manfully–all of
we find, and out of defeat, we snatched our it. I barely did as well. For 43 days, the
victory. authorities would not tell me what had
For the nation, Ninoy became the pleasing happened to him. This was the first time my
sacrifice that answered their prayers for children and I felt we had lost him.
freedom. For myself and our children, Ninoy
was a loving husband and father. His loss, When that didn’t work, they put him on trial
three times in our lives, was always a deep for subversion, murder and a host of other
and painful one. crimes before a military commission. Ninoy
challenged its authority and went on a fast.
Fourteen years ago, this month was the first If he survived it, then, he felt, God intended
time we lost him. A president-turned- him for another fate. We had lost him again.
dictator, and traitor to his oath, suspended For nothing would hold him back from his
the Constitution and shut down the Congress determination to see his fast through to the
that was much like this one before which I end. He stopped only when it dawned on
am honored to speak. He detained my him that the government would keep his
husband along with thousands of others – body alive after the fast had destroyed his
senators, publishers and anyone who had brain. And so, with barely any life in his
spoken up for the democracy as its end drew body, he called off the fast on the fortieth
near. But for Ninoy, a long and cruel ordeal day. God meant him for other things, he felt.
was reserved. The dictator already knew that He did not know that an early death would
Ninoy was not a body merely to be still be his fate, that only the timing was
imprisoned but a spirit he must break. For wrong.
At any time during his long ordeal, Ninoy
could have made a separate peace with the
dictatorship, as so many of his countrymen
had done. But the spirit of democracy that
inheres in our race and animates this
chamber could not be allowed to die. He
held out, in the loneliness of his cell and the
frustration of exile, the democratic
alternative to the insatiable greed and
mindless cruelty of the right and the purging
holocaust of the left.
And then, we lost him, irrevocably and more
painfully than in the past. The news came to
us in Boston. It had to be after the three
happiest years of our lives together. But his
death was my country’s resurrection in the
courage and faith by which alone they could
be free again. The dictator had called him a
nobody. Two million people threw aside
their passivity and escorted him to his grave.
And so began the revolution that has
brought me to democracy’s most famous
home, the Congress of the United States.
The task had fallen on my shoulders to
continue offering the democratic alternative
to our people.
Archibald Macleish had said that democracy
must be defended by arms when it is
attacked by arms and by truth when it is
attacked by lies. He failed to say how it shall
be won.
I held fast to Ninoy’s conviction that it must
be by the ways of democracy. I held out for
participation in the 1984 election the
dictatorship called, even if I knew it would
be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of
the opposition that I ran the grave risk of
legitimizing the foregone results of elections
that were clearly going to be fraudulent. But
I was not fighting for lawyers but for the
people in whose intelligence I had implicit
faith. By the exercise of democracy, even in
a dictatorship, they would be prepared for
democracy when it came. And then, also, it
was the only way I knew by which we could
measure our power even in the terms
dictated by the dictatorship.
The people vindicated me in an election
shamefully marked by government thuggery
and fraud. The opposition swept the
elections, garnering a clear majority of the
votes, even if they ended up, thanks to a
corrupt Commission on Elections, with
barely a third of the seats in parliament.
Now, I knew our power.
Last year, in an excess of arrogance, the
dictatorship called for its doom in a snap
election. The people obliged. With over a
million signatures, they drafted me to
challenge the dictatorship. And I obliged
them. The rest is the history that
dramatically unfolded on your television
screen and across the front pages of your
newspapers.
You saw a nation, armed with courage and
integrity, stand fast by democracy against
threats and corruption. You saw women poll
watchers break out in tears as armed goons
crashed the polling places to steal the ballots
but, just the same, they tied themselves to
the ballot boxes. You saw a people so
committed to the ways of democracy that
they were prepared to give their lives for its
pale imitation. At the end of the day, before
another wave of fraud could distort the
results, I announced the people’s victory.
The distinguished co-chairman of the United
States observer team in his report to your
President described that victory:
“I was witness to an extraordinary
manifestation of democracy on the part of
the Filipino people. The ultimate result was
the election of Mrs. Corazon C. Aquino as
President and Mr. Salvador Laurel as Vice-
President of the Philippines.”
Many of you here today played a part in
changing the policy of your country towards
us. We, Filipinos, thank each of you for
what you did: for, balancing America’s
strategic interest against human concerns,
illuminates the American vision of the
world.
When a subservient parliament announced
my opponent’s victory, the people turned
out in the streets and proclaimed me
President. And true to their word, when a
handful of military leaders declared
themselves against the dictatorship, the
people rallied to their protection. Surely, the
people take care of their own. It is on that
faith and the obligation it entails, that I
assumed the presidency.
As I came to power peacefully, so shall I
keep it. That is my contract with my people
and my commitment to God. He had willed
that the blood drawn with the lash shall not,
in my country, be paid by blood drawn by
the sword but by the tearful joy of
reconciliation.
We have swept away absolute power by a
limited revolution that respected the life and
freedom of every Filipino. Now, we are
restoring full constitutional government.
Again, as we restored democracy by the
ways of democracy, so are we completing
the constitutional structures of our new
democracy under a constitution that already
gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A
jealously independent Constitutional
Commission is completing its draft which
will be submitted later this year to a popular
referendum. When it is approved, there will
be congressional elections. So within about
a year from a peaceful but national upheaval
that overturned a dictatorship, we shall have
returned to full constitutional government.
Given the polarization and breakdown we
inherited, this is no small achievement.
My predecessor set aside democracy to save
it from a communist insurgency that
numbered less than 500. Unhampered by
respect for human rights, he went at it
hammer and tongs. By the time he fled, that
insurgency had grown to more than 16,000.
I think there is a lesson here to be learned
about trying to stifle a thing with the means
by which it grows.
I don’t think anybody, in or outside our
country, concerned for a democratic and
open Philippines, doubts what must be done.
Through political initiatives and local
reintegration programs, we must seek to
bring the insurgents down from the hills and,
by economic progress and justice, show
them that for which the best intentioned
among them fight.
As President, I will not betray the cause of
peace by which I came to power. Yet
equally, and again no friend of Filipino
democracy will challenge this, I will not
stand by and allow an insurgent leadership
to spurn our offer of peace and kill our
young soldiers, and threaten our new
freedom.
Yet, I must explore the path of peace to the
utmost for at its end, whatever
disappointment I meet there, is the moral
basis for laying down the olive branch of
peace and taking up the sword of war. Still,
should it come to that, I will not waver from
the course laid down by your great liberator:
“With malice towards none, with charity for
all, with firmness in the rights as God gives
us to see the rights, let us finish the work we
are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to
care for him who shall have borne the battle,
and for his widow and for his orphans, to do
all which may achieve and cherish a just and
lasting peace among ourselves and with all
nations.”
Like Lincoln, I understand that force may be
necessary before mercy. Like Lincoln, I
don’t relish it. Yet, I will do whatever it
takes to defend the integrity and freedom of
my country.
Finally, may I turn to that other slavery: our
$26 billion foreign debt. I have said that we
shall honor it. Yet must the means by which
we shall be able to do so be kept from us?
Many conditions imposed on the previous
government that stole this debt continue to
be imposed on us who never benefited from
it. And no assistance or liberality
commensurate with the calamity that was
visited on us has been extended. Yet ours
must have been the cheapest revolution ever.
With little help from others, we Filipinos
fulfilled the first and most difficult
conditions of the debt negotiation the full
restoration of democracy and responsible
government. Elsewhere, and in other times
of more stringent world economic
conditions, Marshall plans and their like
were felt to be necessary companions of
returning democracy.
When I met with President Reagan
yesterday, we began an important dialogue
about cooperation and the strengthening of
the friendship between our two countries.
That meeting was both a confirmation and a
new beginning and should lead to positive
results in all areas of common concern.
Today, we face the aspirations of a people
who had known so much poverty and
massive unemployment for the past 14 years
and yet offered their lives for the abstraction
of democracy. Wherever I went in the just the interest on a debt whose benefit the
campaign, slum area or impoverished Filipino people never received.
village, they came to me with one cry: Still, we fought for honor, and, if only for
democracy! Not food, although they clearly honor, we shall pay. And yet, should we
needed it, but democracy. Not work, have to wring the payments from the sweat
although they surely wanted it, but of our men’s faces and sink all the wealth
democracy. Not money, for they gave what piled up by the bondsman’s two hundred
little they had to my campaign. They didn’t fifty years of unrequited toil?
expect me to work a miracle that would
instantly put food into their mouths, clothes Yet to all Americans, as the leader of a
on their back, education in their children, proud and free people, I address this
and work that will put dignity in their lives. question: has there been a greater test of
But I feel the pressing obligation to respond national commitment to the ideals you hold
quickly as the leader of a people so dear than that my people have gone
deserving of all these things. through? You have spent many lives and
much treasure to bring freedom to many
We face a communist insurgency that feeds lands that were reluctant to receive it. And
on economic deterioration, even as we carry here you have a people who won it by
a great share of the free world defenses in themselves and need only the help to
the Pacific. These are only two of the many preserve it.
burdens my people carry even as they try to
build a worthy and enduring house for their Three years ago, I said thank you, America,
new democracy, that may serve as well as a for the haven from oppression, and the home
redoubt for freedom in Asia. Yet, no sooner you gave Ninoy, myself and our children,
is one stone laid than two are taken away. and for the three happiest years of our lives
Half our export earnings, 2billionoutof 4 together. Today, I say, join us, America, as
billion, which was all we could earn in the we build a new home for democracy,
restrictive markets of the world, went to pay another haven for the oppressed, so it may
stand as a shining testament of our two
nation’s commitment to freedom.
Analysis of Cory Aquino’s Speech
Cory Aquino’s speech was an important event in the political and diplomatic history of the
country because it has arguably cemented the legitimacy of the EDSA government in the
international arena. The speech talks of her family background, especially her relationship with
her late husband, Ninoy Aquino. It is well known that it was Ninoy who served as the real
leading figure of the opposition of that time. Indeed, Ninoy’s eloquence and charisma could
very well compete with that of Marcos. In her speech, Cory talked at length about Ninoy’s toil
and suffering at the hands of the dictatorship that he resisted. Even when she proceeded talking
about her new government, she still went back to Ninoy’s legacies and lessons. Moreover, her
attributions of the revolution to Ninoy’s death demonstrates not only Cory’s personal perception
on the revolution, but since she was the president, it also represents what the document
discourse was at that point in our history.
The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also be seen in the same
speech. Aquino was able to draw the sharp contrast between her government and her
predecessor by expressing her commitment to a democratic constitution upholds and adheres to
the rights and liberty of the Filipino people. Cory also hoisted herself as the reconciliatory agent
after more than two decades of a polarizing authoritarian politics. For example, Cory saw the
blown-up communist insurgency as a product of a repressive and corrupt government. Her
response to this insurgency rooted from her diametric opposition of the dictator. (i.e. initiating
reintegration of the communist rebels to the mainstream Philippines society.) Cory claimed that
her main approach to this problem was through pace and not through the sword of war.
Despite Cory’s efforts to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her speech still revealed
certain parallelisms between her and the Marco’s government. This is seen in terms of
continuing the alliance between the Philippines and the United States despite the known affinity
between the said world super power and Marcos. The Aquino regime, as seen in Cory’s
acceptance of the invitation to address the U.S. Congress and to the content of the speech,
decided to build and continue the alliance between the Philippines and the United States and
effectively implemented an essentially similar foreign policy to that of dictatorship. For
example, Cory recognized that the large sum of foreign debts incurred by the Marcos regime
never benefited the Filipino People. Nevertheless, Cory expressed her intentions to pay off
those debts. Unknown to many Filipinos was the fact that there was a choice of waiving the said
debt because those were the debt of the dictator and not the country. Cory’s decision is an
indicator of her government’s intention to carry on a debt driven economy.
Reading through Aquino’s speech, we can already take cues, not just on Cory’s individual ideas
and aspirations, but also the guiding principles and framework of the government that she
represented.
Speech of President Ferdinand Marcos during the termination of Martial Law
It was on September 21, 1972 when the late President Ferdinand Marcos promulgated
Proclamation No. 1081, placing the entire Philippines under Martial Law in order to protect the
integrity of the Republic from the rising wave of lawlessness and the threat of a communist
insurgency. This curtailed press freedom and other civil liberties, closed down Congress and
media establishments, and caused the arrest of opposition leaders and militant activists.
Then, by virtue of Proclamation No. 2045, Marcos lifted the state of martial law to show the
Filipino people and the world that the situation in the Philippines was back to normal and that
the 1973 Constitution and the government were working smoothly.
In this lesson, we are going to examine the speech made by President Marcos during the
termination of Martial law in the country, titled Encounter with Destiny. We will also discover
how the legacy of the Marcos administration and the Martial Law continues to affect our
political landscape as we move forward as a democratic country.
SPEECH OF PRESIDENT MARCOS
DURING THE TERMINATION OF MARTIAL LAW
Ferdinand Emmanuel Edralin Marcos Sr. was born on September 11, 1917, in Ilocos Norte
province. He was a member of the Philippine House of Representatives (1949-1959) and Senate
(1959-1965) before winning the presidential election. After winning a second term, he declared
martial law in 1972, that eventually leads to economic stagnation and recurring reports of
human rights violations. Marcos held onto the presidency until 1986 when his people rose
against his rule and he was forced to flee. He died on September 28, 1989 in exile in Honolulu,
Hawaii.
During World War II, Ferdinand Marcos served as an officer with his country's armed forces,
later claiming that he was also a top figure in the Filipino guerrilla resistance movement. At the
end of the war, when the American government granted the Philippines independence on July 4,
1946, the Philippine Congress was created. Marcos was inaugurated on December 30, 1965. His
first presidential term was notable for his decision to send troops into the fray of the Vietnam
War, a move he had previously opposed as a Liberal Party senator. He also focused on
construction projects and bolstering the country's rice production. Marcos was reelected in
1969, the first Filipino president to win a second term, but violence and fraud were associated
with his campaign, which was believed to be funded with millions from the national treasury.
Marcos decreed martial law in 1972.
On September 21, 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos placed the Philippines under Martial Law.
The declaration issued under the Proclamation 1081 suspended the civil rights and imposed
military authority in the country. Marcos defended the declaration stressing the need for extra
powers to suppress the rising wave of violence allegedly caused by communists.
Marcos wants to save the republic from evil elements like communists by declaring the Military
Law. Instead of losing and losing communists, their members grew stronger and more, they
fueled against the Marcos regime.
Marcos wanted to change society through the Military Law. He already changed society
because the Filipinos are already afraid of him. Social reforms also included the implementation
of a nutrition program. There are 4,000-daycare centers all over the land. Their model, which
has been adopted by the United Nations—health program, a family planning program which
had been long denied the humblest and the poorest of the countrymen. Government reform a
program in the word “PLEDGES” which means Peace and Order; Land Reform; Economic
Development; Development of moral values; Government Reform; Educational Reforms and
Social Services.
The Gross National Product increased from P55,526 million in 1972 to P192,911 million in
1979 at 1972 constant prices or P269,781 million at current prices. The Gross National Product
increased from P55,526 million in 1972 to P192,911 million in 1979 at 1972 constant prices or
P269,781 million at current prices. Savings and time deposits have increased from P5,402
million in 1972 to P49,116 million as of September 1980. Gross domestic investments have not
only doubled but trebled, quadrupled, quintupled. From P11,573 million in 1972, it was
increased to about P78,198 million in 1980, while gross national savings increased from
P11,679 million in 1972 to P62,395 million in 1980. There was a time when the debt service
ratio before this administration was more than 40 percent of the dollar earnings the previous
year. This has been reduced to 20 percent; and now, as of 1980, reduced to 18.72 percent of
foreign exchange earnings in the previous year.
When Marcos took over as President in 1965, most of the indebtedness was short-term
indebtedness payable within one year, two years, three years, and five years. More than 90
percent. All of these were immediately shifted or converted into long-term indebtedness, for
some reason or other, because of inefficient management of our affairs. Because of their bad
creditworthiness, they could not borrow any money from anywhere. The most that the World
Bank could lend them before 1965 was $40 million. By 1975 and 1976, the World Bank had
changed its opinion of the Philippines so much so that it was ready to lend at a single time $500
million. But most of these borrowings did not go to the government. They went into productive
enterprises. The borrowings of government do not go to pay for salaries or what those, in
government, call ordinary or current expenditures— housekeeping, salaries of officers and
employees, as well as furniture and equipment. On the current budget, there is always a surplus.
Since 1965 to the present, there has always been a surplus in the current budget of the Republic
of the Philippines.
They have borrowed but only for purposes of productive enterprise. These are the self-paying
and the self-regenerating enterprises which people must support. And, incidentally, nobody
lends you money if you cannot put up a counterpart fund. The least amount of counterpart fund
that is required is about 50 percent of the entire cost of the project.
The international reserves were increased from practically zero in 1965. The statistics say the
US $282 million were left in the Central Bank. When Marcos asked the Central Bank, however,
he was told that their commitments exceeded the US $300 million. And, therefore, they did not
have enough foreign exchange to pay their indebtedness as of 1965. The foreign exchange
reserves were practically zero. And later they have the US $3.1 billion in the Central Bank as
the foreign exchange reserves of the Republic of the Philippines. It was said truly that the rich
will grow richer because they have the funds and the capital. And they have no intention of
confiscating private property. It is not a part of the ideology of the New Society to confiscate
private property and private enterprise. But they shall regulate wealth so it shall not be utilized
to brutalize the poor and the weakness of our people. And thus, it is that the rich must pay
heavier taxes.
In 1972, the percentage of families with incomes of P1,999 and below was 24.3 percent. In
1979, this had been reduced to 11.2 percent, or by more than one-half. The families with
incomes of P30,000 and more. In 1972, there was only 5 percent of them out of the entire
population. Now, there are more than twice that. There is 12.8 percent of those who have this
high income. And considering that almost all of these families that Marcos speak of life in the
rural areas, the New Society certainly has effectively changed the standard of living of the
Filipino masses. Finally, the effective minimum wage had increased from P4.75 in 1972 to
P23.30-24.70 in 1980.
There has been a major change in government since the proclamation of Martial Law. The
Congress that makes and outsourcing laws has been abolished. The senators and representatives
have been removed from duty. Under the Military Act, the President had the legislative power.
He made Presidential Decrees, General Orders, and Letter of Instruction. These will govern the
Government and all civilian powers. The Presidential Order is valid and forceful as the laws
issued by the former Congress.

HISTORICAL & CONTEMPORARY RELEVANCE

As the country was suffering from grinding poverty, widespread corruption, a stalled political
and judicial system, and internal violence, three alternative explanations for the martial law
decision may include the following:
The official, the constitutional explanation is the threat of violent rebellion.
Another view sees martial law as Marcos' way of circumventing congressional and bureaucratic
obstruction to achieve reforms and eliminate corruption--whether for altruistic or selfish
reasons.
The "imperialist lackey" view focuses on Marcos' relations to the United States and
multinational business interests. Marcos is protecting foreign investors and granting huge
incentives for oil exploration, against the wishes of the Congress; some believe that his purpose
is to stabilize himself in power and avoid demanding that the United States pay rent on its
Philippine bases.
This document will help constructively recognize the contributions of President Marcos to the
country's economic, social, cultural, and educational development. These contributions have
shaped our nation as it is today. We also have to put a premium on his legacies which we
undeniably enjoy now. Moreover, the primary source should let us learn from the lessons of the
past.
Paintings of Juan Luna and Fernando Amorsolo
Do Arts like paintings provide a glimpse of history? Paintings are art and painters paint to
express their thoughts, ideas, and feelings; hence, every painting has its own significance and
meaning. The Philippines is also known for arts especially in paintings.
In this lesson, we are going to discuss the works of the well-renowned Filipino painters who
have contributed so much to Philippine history, namely Juan Luna and Fernando Amorsolo.
Both of them are remarkable artists of different styles and techniques in relaying their
subjective energies through their masterpieces. The paintings of Juan Luna and Fernando
Amorsolo had reflected the life of Filipinos during the latter part of the Spanish Colonization,
the middle years of American rule, and Japanese occupation in our country that arouse the sense
of nationalism and showcase the Philippine Culture as well as the greatness of Filipinos in arts.
JUAN LUNA'S PAINTINGS AUTHOR’S BACKGROUND
Juan Luna (October 23, 1857- December 7, 1899) was known as the “Finest arts and First
International Filipino Painter”. He was the son Juaquin Luna de San Pedro y Posadas and
Laureana Novicio y Ancheta that was born on October 23, 1857, in Badoc, Ilocos Norte. He
was influenced to paint by his brother Manuel who was also a painter. Juan Luna is considered
one of the greatest Filipino artists in Philippine history with masterpieces such as Solarium, The
Death of Cleopatra, and Blood Compact. He was a Filipino painter, sculptor, and a political
activist of the Philippine Revolution during the late 19th century. He was one of the first
recognized Philippine artists. His close friendship with National Hero Jose Rizal has sparked
Philippine nationalism and pride. Juan Luna was mostly known for his works as being dramatic
and dynamic, focusing on romanticism and realism styles of art.
On December 8, 1886, Luna married Maria de la Paz Pardo de Tavera, a sister of his friend
Felix and Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, the couple traveled to Europe and settled in Paris. They
had one son, whom they named Andres and a daughter who died in infancy.
Educational Background
He received his degree in Bachelor of Arts at Ateneo de Manila and enrolled later at Escuela
Nautica de Manila where he became a sailor. This did not stop Luna from his pursuit of
developing his artistic skills. He took lessons under the famous painting teacher Lorenzo
Guerrero and also enrolled at Academia de Dibujo y Pintura under the Spanish artist Agustin
Saez.
Luna left for Barcelona in 1877, together with his elder brother Manuel, who was a violinist.
While there, Luna widened his knowledge of the art and he was exposed to the immortal works
of the Renaissance masters. One of his private teachers, Alejo Vera, a famous contemporary
painter in Spain, took Luna to Rome to undertake certain commissions. In 1877, Juan Luna
traveled to Europe to continue his studies and enrolled at Escuela de Bellas Artes de San
Fernando. It was in 1881 when he received his first major achievement as an artist and this is
through winning a silver medal at the Nacional de Bellas Artes (National Demonstration of Fine
Arts) with his work “The Death of Cleopatra.” From there, he continued to gain recognition and
respect as an artist. Juan Luna kept on impressing the European and Filipino society through the
Nacional de Bellas Artes with outstanding works such as the “Spolarium” which won gold in
1884 and “Battle at Lepanto” in 1887.
Awards
• Silver Medal for La Muerte de Cleopatra (Death of Cleopatra), Rome 1881
• Silver Palette for Dafinis Y Cloe (Roman Youths), Rome, 1881
• 1st Gold Medal (1st Class) for Sploliarium (Rome, 1884
• Silver Palette with Laurel for Spoliarium (Madrid, 1884)
• 1st Gold Meda (3rd Class) for Spoliarium (Madrid, 1884)
• Diploma of Honor for Las Damas Romanas (Roman Ladies), Paris, 1886
• Diploma of Honor for La Mestiza en Su Tocador (The Mestiza in her Boundier), Venice,
1886
• Gold Medal/Special Award for La Batalla de Lepanto (Paris, 1887)
• Bronze Medal for Hymen, Oh Hymenee (A Roman Wedding) (Venice, 1886)
• Honorary Award for Chiffonier (Paris, 1888)
• Gold Medal (Posthumous Award) for Peuple et Rois (People and Kings), Paris, 1882
• Silver Medal (Posthumous Award for El Pacto de Sangre (The Blood Compact), Paris,
1886
• Silver Medal (Posthumous Award) for Don Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, Paris, 1886
The masterpieces of Juan Luna were created during the Spanish Colonization of the Philippines
in the 19th Century and some were created during the midyears of American Rule in the
Philippines.
Death of Cleopatra, Rome 1881
The famous painting was a silver medalist or second prize winner during the 1881 National
Exposition of Fine Arts in Madrid. The 1881 Madrid painting contest was Luna's first art
exposition. Because of the exposure, Luna received a pension scholarship at the Ayuntamiento
de Manila. After the painting competition, Luna sold it for 5,000 Spanish pesetas, the highest
price for a painting at the time. As Luna's "graduation work", The Death of Cleopatra was
acquired by the Spanish government for one thousand euros.
Blood Compact, Paris 1885
It depicts the traditional “kasikasi” or drinking ceremony which was a symbol of friendship,
peace, and goodwill among those executing the compact. Blood Compact executed by the
Spaniards in the Philippines held on March 16, 1565, between Don Miguel Lopez de Legazpi
and Rajah Sikatuna of Bohol.

Spoliarium
The painting features a glimpse of Roman history centered on the bloody carnage brought by
gladiatorial matches. Spoliarium is a Latin word referring to the basement of the Roman
Colosseum where the fallen and dying gladiators are dumped and devoid of their worldly
possessions.
At the center of Luna’s painting are fallen gladiators being dragged by Roman soldiers. On the
left, spectators ardently await their chance to strip off the combatants of their metal helmets and
other armories. In contrast with the charged emotions featured on the left, the right side
meanwhile presents a somber mood. An old man carries a torch perhaps searching for his son
while a woman weeps the death of her loved one.
The Spoliarium is the most valuable oil-on-canvas painting by Juan Luna, a Filipino educated at
the Academia de Dibujo y Pintura (Philippines) and at the Academia de San Fernando in
Madrid, Spain. With a size of 4.22 meters x 7.675 meters, it is the largest painting in the
Philippines. A historical painting, it was made by Luna in 1884 as an entry to the prestigious
Exposicion de Bellas Artes (Madrid Art Exposition, May 1884) and eventually won for him the
First Gold Medal.
The Parisian Life
Juan Luna painted this masterpiece in 1892 when he was staying in Paris, France. It is called
The Parisian Life but is also known as Interior d’un Cafi (meaning “inside a cafe”). He used oil
on canvas to create this 22 x 31-inch painting.
This may seem like any other old piece of artwork but the details and story of this masterpiece
are one of a kind. The men in the background are actually three well known Filipinos: Juan
Luna himself, Jose Rizal, a very famous author and hero, and Ariston Bautista Lin, the first
owner of the painting. These men were all living in France at that time.
España Y Filipinas
Her mirror image is said to resemble the archipelago of the Philippines – her outstretched arm
being the island of Palawan. Another interesting detail is the darkness on the woman’s neck and
the line going from her head to the top of the picture. This apparently shows that the Philippines
was going through a time of struggle which could very well be because they were being
oppressed by the Spanish at that time.
España Y Filipinas meaning “Spain and the Philippines” is an oil on wood painting of Juan
Luna in 1886. The two women together are the representation of Spain and the Philippines. The
painting also is known as España Guiando a Filipinas (Spain Leading the Philippines).
In this painting, Juan Luna wants to show the strong bond between Spain and the Philippines. It
also revealed the true hope and desire of every Filipino to have an equal treatment between
Spain and the Philippines, even Spain leading the Philippines in a progressive country.
FERNANDO AMORSOLO'S PAINTINGS AUTHOR'S BACKGROUND
Fernando Cueto Amorsolo (May 30, 1892 – April 26, 1972) is one of the most important artists
in the history of painting in the Philippines. Amorsolo was a portraitist and painter of rural
Philippine landscapes. Fernando Amorsolo was born on May 30, 1892, in Paco, Manila to
Pedro Amorsolo, a bookkeeper, and Bonifacia Cueto. Amorsolo spent his childhood in Daet,
Camarines Norte, where he studied in a public school and was tutored at home in Spanish
reading and writing. After his father’s death, Amorsolo and his family moved to Manila to live
with Don Fabian de la Rosa, his mother’s cousin, and a Philippine painter. At the age of 13,
Amorsolo became an apprentice to De la Rosa, who would eventually become the advocate and
guide to Amorsolo’s painting career. During this time, Amorsolo’s mother embroidered to earn
money, while Amorsolo helped by selling watercolor postcards to a local bookstore for 10
centavos each. Amorsolo’s brother, Pablo, was also a painter.
During his lifetime, Amorsolo was married twice and had 14 children. In 1916, he married
Salud Jorge, with whom he had six children. After Jorges death in 1931, Amorsolo married
Maria del Carmen Zaragoza, with whom he had eight more children. Among her daughters are
Sylvia Amorsolo Lazo and Luz Amorsolo. Five of Amorsolo children became painters
themselves. Amorsolo was a close friend to the Philippine sculptor Guillermo Tolentino, the
creator of the Caloocan. It is believed that he had painted more than 10,000 pieces, his Rice
Planting (1922), which appeared on posters and tourist brochures, became one of the most
popular images of the Commonwealth era. He died on April 24, 1972, at the age of 79.
Educational Background
Amorsolo earned a degree from the Liceo de Manila Art School in 1909 and entered the
University of the Philippines' School of Fine Arts. He was a portrait artist and known painter of
rural Philippine landscapes. He graduated with honors from the U.P. in 1914 and got a study
grant in Madrid, Spain. He was also able to visit New York, where he encountered postwar
impressionism and cubism, which would be major influences on his work. Don Fabian De La
Rosa advocate and guide to Amorsolo’s painting career while Diego Velasquez is the major
influence of Amorsolo’s and Enrique Zobel De Ayala gave him the grant to study in Madrid,
Spain.
Awards
 1908 2nd Prize, Bazar Escolta (Asociacion Internacional de Artistas), for Levendo
Periodico
 1922 1st Prize, Commercial and Industrial Fair in the Manila Carnival
 1929 (1939?) 1st Prize, New York’s World Fair, for Afternoon Meal of Rice Workers
(also known as Noonday Meal of the Rice Workers)
 1940 Outstanding University of the Philippines Alumnus Award
 1959 Gold Medal, UNESCO National Commission
 1961 Rizal Pro Patria Award
 1961 Honorary Doctorate in the Humanities, from the Far Eastern University
 1963 Diploma of Merit from the University of the Philippines
 1963 Patnubay ng Sining at Kalinangan Award, from the City of Manila
 1963 Republic Cultural Heritage Award
 1972 Gawad CCP para sa Sining, from the Cultural Center of the Philippines
The masterpieces of Amorsolo were created during the American colonial rule and the Japanese
occupation of the Philippines during World War II.
The painter Fernando Amorsolo (1892-1972) was a dominant figure in the visual arts of the
Philippines during the decades before the Second World War and into the post-war period. His
oeuvre is characterized by scenes of the Filipino countryside, harmoniously composed and
richly colored, saturated with bright sunlight and populated by beautiful, happy people: it is an
art of beauty, contentment, peace, and plenty – which perhaps explains its enduring popularity
in the Philippines to this day. Moreover, Amorsolo's paintings commemorate the different
tradition, cultures, and customs of Filipinos.
Planting Rice with Mayon Volcano
Planting Rice with Mayon Volcano was painted in 1949. Happy Filipino villagers in their bright
clothes and straw hats work together amid a green and sunlit landscape of plenty. Behind them,
releasing a peaceful plume of steam rises the beautifully symmetrical cone of Mayon
stratovolcano. It is the ash erupted by the volcano over its highly-active history that has made
the surrounding landscape fertile, and the tranquil cone appears here to be a beneficial spirit of
the earth standing Planting Rice with Mayon Volcano, guardian over the villagers and their
crops. Mayon’s eruptions can be very destructive (as in the violent eruption of 1947, not long
before this picture was painted, when pyroclastic flows and lahars brought widespread
destruction and fatalities) but here the relationship between the volcano and the surrounding
landscape is depicted as a positive, fruitful and harmonious one. Mayon is a celebrated symbol
of the Philippines, and its presence in Amorsolo’s painting emphasizes his wish to represent the
spirit of the nation on canvas.
Fernando Amorsolo created this painting during the year 1937. This year was the rise of
women's rights. Many events for the Filipinas occurred during that time. One, the Philippines
held a plebiscite for Filipino women on whether they should be extended the right to suffrage;
over 90% voted in the affirmative. Also, for the first-ever, Filipino women were given the right
to vote during elections.
The artist, Amorsolo, created this artwork to show the true value of Filipinos. They are
hardworking yet happy of what they are doing. It was to also make the world aware of the true
Filipina beauty. Overall, this painting was intended to show Filipino’s characteristic glow. This
can be proven by looking at the characters in the painting.
The artwork is entitled Fruit Pickers Under the Mango Tree. It was painted by Fernando
Amorsolo a famous Filipino artist. It was made by using oil on 25 1/4 x 37 1/2 inches canvas
and was finished in the year 1937.
The Making of the Philippine Flag
The painting shows three women namely Marcella Marino de Agoncillo (on the right side) refer
as the mother of the Philippine flag, with the help of Lorenza and Delfina Herbosa de Natividad
which is actually the daughter of Marcela. They were tasked by Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo to sew
the first flag for the new republic. The clothes that the women are wearing are an older style,
more vintage, and really depict the traditional styles. The skirts the women are wearing are long
and their tops were like The Fruit Pickers under the Mango Tree The Making of the Philippine
Flag a traditional “kimona”. The three women are sewing passionately which demonstrates
elegance. The painting was not that kind of vibrant in the eyes but can set your mood is calm.
The setting is inside of a house which is more like a “Bahay Kubo” The main colors that were
used in the painting were brown, red, blue, and yellow. The mood and visual effects that this
painting can be considered are calmness and serenity. The painting shows a contrast of colors of
brown to yellow which is not harmonious. The artist balanced his characters and the
background in his painting which makes the painting balanced. There are no real lines in the
painting because it is painted in a pointillist style.
Defense of a Filipina Woman’s Honour
This is a representative of Amorsolo's World War II-era paintings. Here, a Filipino man defends
a woman, who is either his wife or daughter, from being raped by an unseen Japanese soldier.
Note the Japanese military cap at the man's foot.
After the onset of World War II, Amorsolo's typical pastoral scenes were replaced by the
depictions of a war-torn nation. During the Japanese occupation of the Philippines during World
War II, Amorsolo spent his days at his home near the Japanese garrison, where he sketched war
scenes from the house's windows or rooftop.
During the war, he documented the destruction of many landmarks in Manila and the pain,
tragedy, and death experienced by Filipino people, with his subjects including "women
mourning their dead husbands, files of people with pushcarts and makeshift bags leaving a dark
burning city tinged with red from fire and blood. "Amorsolo frequently portrayed the lives and
suffering of Filipina women during World War II. Other World War II-era paintings by
Amorsolo include a portrait in absentia of General Douglas MacArthur as well as self-portraits
and paintings of Japanese occupation soldiers.
The Raiders of Sulu Sea
We live in a pluralistic world and a conflict-torn world. Sad to say that some of these are the
open armed conflicts and bloody resistance between Muslims and Christians.
The gap of these two religious standpoints was undeniably huge. But what really happened in
the gap of these two that it seems to continue years after until today? How and why these
Muslim People were called pirates and raiders? Are they really what they call and identify,
“The Raiders of the Sulu Sea?”
For this lesson, we are going to examine a historiography documentary film that exhibits how
the tribes of men on certain parts of Mindanao fiercely fought against the Spaniards whom at
that time, colonized the Philippines. This documentary film was narrated by several key
informants that made the film more understandable by actually being a part of it. These people
studied and analysed the whole history of the conflict and identified causes of it.
THE RAIDERS OF SULU SEA
THE BACKGROUND OF THE AUTHORS AND NARRATORS
Icelle Gloria Durano Borja Estrada was born in Zamboanga City and was a 7th generation
direct descendant of Vicente Alvarez, the hero of Zamboanga City during the Spanish-
American War. She earned her first degree at Western Mindanao State University (WMSU) of
Bachelor of Science in History Education; then continued finishing other degrees at Pilar
College, Zamboanga City; University of the Philippines Diliman College of Fine Arts, major in
Art History; and Ateneo de Zamboanga City.
She is a collector of art and is a member of the National Commission on Museums of the
National Commission for Culture and the Arts of the Philippines, President of the Mindanao
Association of Museums and for many years, was a curator of Art Museum Exhibits in the
Philippines and abroad.
Dr. Samuel Kong Tan is a Samal-Taosug-Chinese Filipino born in Siasi, Sulu. He earned his
Masters Degree in History at University of the Philippines Diliman and his Doctoral in
Philosophy in Interdisciplinary Studies at Syracuse University, New York, USA. He is a
published Author and served as the Chairperson of UP Diliman’s Department of History and
was also the Chairman and Executive Director of the National Historical Institute in 1998.
He is well-known for his famous book “A History of the Philippines”, briefly describes the
human history and culture of the Philippines, focusing on three Filipino cultural communities--
the Moros, the Indios, and the Infieles--and examining how these groups reflect the country's
history and development.
He shared his view about the colonial depictions of Moro “Slave raiding” in the Philippines
coastal towns where it demonstrated the open-armed resistance to the colonial rule of the
Muslims.
Prof. Barbara Watson Andaya, born on June 7, 1943, is an Australian historian and author
who studies Indonesia and Maritime Southeast Asian History. She had done extensive
researches on women’s history in Southeast Asia, and of late, on the localization of Christianity
in the Region.
She received her Bachelor of Arts and Diploma of Education in Asian Studies from the
University of Sydney. She also earned her Doctoral in Philosophy in Southeast Asian
University at Cornell University with a specialization in Southeast Asian History and got her
Masters Degree at the University of Hawaii. She teaches courses as a full-time professor in
Asian Studies and is the director of the University’s Center for Southeast Asian Studies. She
was the president of the American Association for Asian Studies from 2005 to 2006.
Dr. Julius Bautista is currently appointed as Senior Lecturer at the Department of Southeast
Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore. He remains as an Associate of the
Religion and Globalization in Asian Contexts Cluster at Asia Research Institute.
He is an anthropologist and cultural historian who earned a Doctorate degree in Philosophy in
Southeast Asian Studies from the Center for Asian Societies and Histories at the Australian
National University. He was a Visiting Fellow at ARI's Religion and Globalisation in Asian
Contexts Cluster from 2005 to 2011. His teaching and research interests include Catholicism in
the Philippines, Comparative World Religions, The material culture of Southeast Asia, Pain,
Nociception and religious ritual, Ethnographic practice and methodology, and Asian-Australian
heritage scholarship.
Halman Abubakar is a Taosug and a town councilor of Jolo, Sulu, and is a member of the
educated Abubakar Clan of Jolo. He asserts that the attacks on the Spanish forces were the
Moro reaction to Spanish and American imposition on the Moro People.
He promotes indigenous martial arts "Silat" –historic and significant on Taosug bladed
weapons; as a form of selfdefense and glorifies the historic and symbolic significance of these
weapons. He also shares the sentiments of his people by resenting the characterization of
Western Colony and Filipino historiography as "pirates".
Dr. Margarita “Tingting” R. Cojuangco is a Filipino politician, philanthropist, and socialite.
She was the former Chairman of the Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (Kampi) party, was
governor of Tarlac, and was an Undersecretary of the Department of Interior and Local
Government and a member of the Council of Philippine Affairs (COPA). She is a columnist in
The Philippine Star and was a candidate for a seat in the Senate in the 2013 Philippine Senate
Election.
She studied at the University of Santo Tomas with a doctorate degree in Philosophy of Public
Safety, finished her Masters in National Security Administration (MNSA) at the National
Defense College, and holds doctorate degrees in Criminology and Philippine History.
She is known for her humanitarian projects and works among Muslim communities and her
participation in the peace talks with the Moro National Liberation Front.
It is the 18th Century, and life from some of the coastal inhabitants of the Philippines was
anything but idyllic. For without warning, they could be attacked by the merciless Illanuns –the
raiders of the Sulu Sea. These raiders were fearless and fiercer in battle even against better
armed, technologically superior colonial forces.
To the western colonists, these raiders are nothing but barbaric pirates; and they were hunted
down and such. But there is speculation that these raiders are not the savages they were made
out to be, but nearly indigenous people defending their way of life against the foreign
oppressor. There is little doubt that these raiders were skilled fighters and deadly swordsmen,
but they are also expert sailors and builders of formidable vessels of war. These raiders are not
just bandits but a wellorganized force that could attack with the precision of strategy, giving
these western colonial forces a run for their lives.
On December 8th, 1720, the Southern regions of Mindanao were occupied by Spanish soldiers
that were then identified as Zamboanga City. It sits at the tip of the Southwest peninsula of the
Philippines that is protected by the city’s Fort Pilar –a ten-meter-high wall that acted as a
defense fortress. The Fort served as the base of operations to check on slave-raiding going on
the north and back.
King Dalasi was the King of Bulig in Maguindanao who led in attacking the Fort Pillar together
with the forces of the Sulu Sultanate; burned the town around the Fort, cut down the line of
provisions for the Spaniards, and began a war against the soldiers inside the Fort. Dalasi’s
raiders fight with a vengeance and desire to rip Zamboanga City off the Spanish Forces. They
really had to suppress the Spanish presence here in the peninsula because the Fort was their
base of operations.
According to some historians, slave raiding happened in the Philippines long before the
Western Powers arrived but it was never widespread productivity. The arrival of the Spanish
and the desire to dominate trade in the region trigger slavery. The Spanish refer to the slave
raiders as Moros. If they weren’t from different tribes, they would challenge the Spanish
authority for occupancy.
The pirates that were described by the Colonial Powers involved activities of different tribes in
the Mindanao Area as well as the Sulu Archipelago. These 3 Muslim Groups were the
BalangingiSamal Tribe, the Illanuns, and the Taosugs. The Illanuns and Balangingi-Samal
group were both long-standing seafaring communities and would often join forces with the
Taosugs that is known for its fierce warriors. All of the piratical attacks and retaliatory attacks
conducted from Sulu and Maguindanao always carried these contingents.
History also questioned, should these raiders from the south be called “Pirates”? Do these
raiders fight for personal gain or just serving their local, political masters? The documentary
informants stated that “pirates” is misleading because it doesn’t cover raiders and people who
acted on behalf of the state. It was then concluded that the Moro act was an act of retaliation
against the foreign occupier and was sanctioned by the sultanates in the name of a higher
course: Islam.
There was also a certainly great deal of pressure from the South for populations in the Visayas
to become Islamized. But, the presence of the Spanish in the Visayas and Northern Luzon
disrupted the spread of Islam. The Spanish Colonial Administration thought it was their
responsibility to prevent the spread of Islam from the south to the Christianized populations in
the North. They have an impressive empire that their conquest is not only motivated by these
colonies but also by the opportunity to propagate Christianity. Therefore, Christianity deploys
quickly displacing Islam and Indigenous Tribal beliefs.
The Spaniards weren’t concern about what the people in the South were after but rather, was
really more than that they really undermined the commercial interests of the region. Through
this, they gained new power in the region which was exerting its own agendas and its own
influences. However, the Sultanates in the South just wanted to do was to maintain their power,
if not, increase it a little bit more. Both sides use religious ideologies to further influence and
feed their objectives.
Behind the clash of religious doctrines was a more compelling reason for the Spanish to bring
the slave raiders to the hill –the spoils of trade with the orient. Something the Spanish wanted a
fullcontrol of. In many respects, the Spanish wanted to be a part of this exchange in trade but
also wanted to do so in conjunction with the conversion of religious perspective and mindset
and colonization of our Islands.
The documentary film addressed the resistance of the People in the South, the Moros, from the
Spanish-American Colonial forces in the Southern region of the Philippines.
1. The Moro People are not really pirates or rebels but indigenous people who demonstrated
resistance from the Spanish forces.
2. The most celebrated attack was the December 8th, 1970 attack by King Dalasi.
3. The Moro act was an act of retaliation against the foreign occupier and was sanctioned by
the sultanates in the name of a higher course: Islam.
4. Spaniards were concerned about the commercial interests of the region and to propagate
Christianity.
5. Slave-raiding was part of the bigger regional trade in the Islands of Southeast Asia.
6. Artifacts originating from China that was found in Butuan City are proof of the great
distances travelled by the Sea farers of Sulu and the trading activities they were involved
 in
7. The Western Colonial Ruling sand open-armed conflicts in the Southern region of the
Philippines cause the impoverishment of Muslim Areas economically and religiously.
The Three Muslim Tribes
1. Balangingi-Samal Tribe
The Balangingi, also known Northern Sama or Northern Sinama, is an ethnolinguistic
group living on the Greater Sulu Archipelago and the southern and western coastal
regions of the Zamboanga peninsula in Mindanao. They are mostly found in Lutangan
and Olutangga islands in Zamboanga del Sur, Basilan Island of the Sulu Archipelago,
coastal areas of Zamboanga coast peninsula, and as far north as Luzon; particularly in
White Beach near Subic Bay, Zambales. Balangingis are considered to be part of the
larger group of Sama-Badjao and speak the Balangingi dialect.
In the early nineteenth century, an entire ethnic group, the Samal Balangingi of the
SuluMindanao region, specialized in state-sanctioned maritime raiding, attacking
Southeast Asian coastal settlements and trading vessels. This paper traces the process of
the formation of the Samal Balangingi as an ethnic group comprised of 'pirates' and their
captives, and their continued sense of belonging to the island stronghold of Balangingi,
even after its inhabitants were forcefully resettled between 1848 and 1858. The paper also
stresses just how critical the Spanish resettlement policy directed against the deported
Samal Balangingi was for their future cultural and social life. It highlights the
inextricable relationship between maritime raiding, slavery, forced migration, 'homeland',
and cultural identity as being critical factors that led to the emergence of new ethnicities
and diasporas. By highlighting the problems of self-definition and the reconstruction of
identities and the meaning of homeland and lost places, as a revealing social and
psychological process in its own right, the case of the Samal Balangingi challenges lineal
notions of history and bounded static conceptions of 'culture' and ethnic groups that were
imposed, imagined and maintained by Europeans both prior to and after colonization.
2. The Illanuns The Illanun, called Iranun and Ilianon as well, are closely related culturally
and linguistically to the Maranao and Maguindanaon. The Illanun language is part of the
Austronesian family that is most closely related to Maranao. When the Spaniards left,
however, contact between the Maranao and Illanun decreased.
The majority of Illanun live along the coastline in the of the towns of Nulingi, Parang,
Matanog, and Barira in Maguindanao Province, Mindanao; along the Iliana Bay coast,
north of the mouth of the Pulangi River; and all the way to Sibugay Bay in Zamboanga
del Sur and even the western coastal plain of Borneo. Illanun, a Malay term meaning
“pirate,” is appropriate for the people of this ethnic group, who were once regarded as the
fiercest pirates in the Malay area.
3. The Taosug Tribe The dominant ethnic group in the Sulu archipelago because of their
political and religious institutions, the Tausug occupy Jolo, Indanan, Siasi, and Patikul in
Sulu (ARMM). There are also scattered settlements in Zamboanga del Sur and Cotabato,
and all the way to Malaysia, which has an estimated Tausug population of more than
110,000.
Tausug is a combination of tau (person) and suug (the old name of Jolo Island). The
present generation of Tausugs are believed to be descended from the different ethnic
groups that had migrated to the Sulu archipelago.
Traditionally the Tausug are sailors, pearl divers and traders, their ancestral homelands in
the Sulu Archipelago have vigorous tidal currents that flow from the Sulu and China Seas
to the Celebes Sea. This translates literally into the name people of the current.
This native tribe, the first group in the archipelago to be converted to Islam, possess a
courage that is beyond doubt, their bravery is supposed to be unquestionable, therefore
the Tausug are often named Tau Maisug or brave people.
They are proud Muslims renowned for their fierce resistance in the face of Spanish
Conquerors, for 300 years the Tausug and the Spanish were engaged in almost
 continuous warfare, which ended when the Spaniards left the Philippines. The Tausug
regards themselves superior to other Philippine Muslims and still live a combative way of
life, running away from a fight is considered shameful. One old Tausug proverb says:
Hanggang maybuhay, may pag asa, meaning; Never admit defeat as long as you live.
The Ancient Maritime Vessels of the Moro People
The Moro People used compasses, browsed telescopes, and the stars to navigate the seas. They
are also knowledgeable about the monsoon of the region and use them to travel extensively
during the month of August and October in a period called “The Pirate Season.”
1. Lanong
Lanong is a large outrigger warship used by the Iranun and the Banguingui people of the
Philippines. It could reach up to 30 m (98 ft) in length with 6 meters wide hounds, each at
cannons mounted at the bar and had two biped shear masts which doubled as boarding
ladders. It has 24 oars at each side rowed by captures slaves that served as their flagships.
Each vessel carried a hundred to hundred-fifty men including a captain, soldiers, slaves to
row and captured local slaves to navigate unknown waters. The vessels were specialized
for naval battles. They were prominently used for piracy and slave raids from the mid-
18th century to the early 19th century in most of Southeast Asia. Large lanongs were also
inaccurately known by the Spanish as joangas or juangas. The name Lanong is derived
from Lanun, an exonym of the Iranun people.
2. Garay
Garay is a traditional native warship of the Banguingui people in the Philippines. These
are the fast-attack boats of the Samalian Tribes. They were made of Bamboo wood and
Nipa Palm and could carry more than 100 sailors. The ship was 25 meters long and 6
meters across and hounds the power magazine and cannon at the barrel. With 30 to 60
oars in each side, the Garay was faster than any other sea-going vessel of its time.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, they were commonly used for piracy by the Banguingui
and Iranun people against unarmed trading ships and raids on coastal settlements in the
regions surrounding the Sulu Sea. They are smaller, faster and more manoeuvrable
speeding boats replaced from the juangas. The name means "scattered" or "wanderer" in
the Sama language of the Banguingui.
3. Salisipan
Kakap (also known as salisipan) is a canoe-shaped boat which sometimes have
outriggers. They are often used by the Iranun and Banguingui people of the Philippines
for piracy and for raids on coastal areas. They are usually part of fleets with larger
motherships like pangajava, garay, or lanong warships. Among Malays, this type of boat
is used as a boat of war or passenger boat. Raiding fleets are used as auxiliary vessels.
These boats were used to collect manpower and ships from friendly raiding bases along
the way; eventually, building a fearsome, organized sea force.
The Ancient Weapons of the Moro People
1. Kalis / Kris
It is a type of double-edged Filipino sword, often with a "wavy" section The kalis's
double-edged blade can be used for both cutting and thrusting. The sword is more than
300 years old and it was used during the time of the Spanish colonization. It is a weapon
for warfare and servility. It is 2 meters in length and was carried not only by slave raiders
into battle but also nobles and high-ranking officials of southern Sultanates. It’s double-
edge blade is used for easier slashing and penetration to the bone that would stick so it’s
very hard to pull.
2. Barong Barong or Barung is the one Taosug warriors use to cut off an M-14 and a
carabiner because its blade is thick. It is a deadly weapon and a sword with a single-edge
leafshape blade made of thick type of steel. It is also a 1-meter long weapon that was
used to enclose hand to hand battle to cut Spanish firearms down to size. This weapon is
 used by Muslim Filipino ethnolinguistic groups like the Tausug, Sinama or Yakan in the
Southern Philippines.
3. Kampilan
Kampilan is the longest sword that was used by the Illanuns. It is a heavy, single-edge
sword that has two horns projecting from the blunt side of the tip which was used to pick
up the head of the decapitated body. The Kampilan has a distinct profile, with the tapered
blade being much broader and thinner at the point than at its base, sometimes with a
protruding spikelet along the flat side of the tip and a bifurcated hilt which is believed to
represent a mythical creature's open mouth. At about 36 to 40 inches (90 to 100 cm) long,
it is much larger than other Filipino swords.
4. Armor
The armor was made from carabao horn. Its steel plate was molded to fit the body and
held together by chain mail. It could also deflect the blows from a sword but useless
against firearms.
The Ancient Weapons of the Spanish Forces
1. `Musket
The musket could fire 90 meters. It was inaccurate and took several stages steps to
reload.
2. Cannons
It is a type of gun classified as artillery that launches a projectile using propellant. In the
past, gunpowder was the primary propellant before the invention of smokeless powder in
the 19th century. Cannons vary in caliber, range, mobility, rate of fire, angle of fire, and
firepower. Different forms of cannon combine and balance these attributes in varying
degrees, depending on their intended use on the battlefield.
The Fort Pilar of Zamboanga City
Zamboanga City sits at the tip of the Southwest peninsula of the Philippines that is protected by
the city’s Fort Pilar –a ten-meter-high wall that acted as a defense fortress. The Fort served as
the base of operations to check on slave-raiding going on the north and back.
The historiography documentary film “Raiders of the Sulu Sea” is a presentation of the study of
the history that happened in the mid-17th century and the years after that was still in the line
with the Moro-Spanish past. It vindicated the Moro Wars in the Mindanao Region, as to the
influence of Religious Ideologies and economic forces that drove the clash resistance –to what
was the aftermath of it; that will serve as an insight to what happened on the Southern tip of
Zamboanga City and the Western Power sufficing it with artillery and force.
The history of the Moro people is part of the backbone of the historical development of the
Philippines. It was asserted in the film that no Philippine history can be complete without the
study of Muslim development and the Colonization that occurred.
The historical relevance in the Southern Philippines and the Spanish Colonization is concerned
with the line of conflicts in the historical development:
Political: The Moro People frayed for their political power hold that was gradually assimilated
into the jurisdiction of the Philippine Government.
Social: The resistance of the Moro People against the religious influence of the Christianity that
was widely spread by the Spaniards
Economic: Commercial ventures of natural resources fuelled the growing demands of slaves
from the south that intensify the frequency of the Moro people of their raiding expeditions.
Cultural: The artistic indigenous crafts making of the Slave raiders through the boats and
weapons made and used; and also, the pattern of trade that has begun years ago between China
and India long before the entry of Western Powers.
CONTEMPORARY RELEVANCE
In the modern context and setting of the Philippines today, we live in a pluralistic world and a
conflict-torn world. Sad to say that some of these conflicts have been abetted, if not aggravated
by religions, flaring up in open armed conflicts and bloody resistance between Muslims and
Christians. The Philippine context of which we have to share open armed conflicts was in
Mindanao, and have been portrayed as Christian-Muslim Conflict.
The “Raiders of the Sulu Sea” presents the study of the history that happened in the Moro-
Spanish past. It vindicated that the different standpoints of the two parties was brought forth by
the influence of Religious Ideologies and economic forces that drove the clash resistance.
Muslim-Christianity Rivalry is until today, sufficing in our era.
The history of the Moro people and the Colonization that happened in Zamboanga City will
always be a part of the backbone of the historical development of the Philippines. It abridges us
to the perspective of knowing, understanding, and commemorating the importance of the
history of the Southern Region of the Philippines.
The contemporary relevance in the Southern Philippines and the Spanish Colonization is
concerned with the line of causations in the Philippine setting and context today:
Political: The Moro People constructs an autonomous political entity in the South, supported by
the Bangsamoro Organic Law (Republic Act No. 11054)
Social: The acceptance and acknowledgment for the Moro People with regards to religious
differences and ideologies in our modern time.
Economic: To combat the freedom to attain and acclaim natural resources against the
oppression of big companies and international trading system; and also the tax system
supported by TRAIN LAW that would only threaten continuing poor areas in the South.
Cultural: The preservation of the indigenous crafts and products in the South and the
continuity of performing indigenous arts and beliefs is a way of keeping the culture alive.
The Site of the First Mass
In this module, we will analyze the historiographical problems in Philippine history in an
attempt to apply what we have learned thus far in the work of a historian and the process of
historical inquiry. There are two key concepts that we need to define before proceeding to the
historical analysis of problems in history. These are interpretation and multiperspectivity.
“Making sense of the past” is a process wherein historians utilize facts collected from primary
sources and then draw their own reading so that their intended audience may understand the
historical event. The premise is that not all primary sources are accessible to a general audience,
and without the proper training and background may do more harm than good. Interpretation of
the past, therefore, vary according to who reads the primary source, when it was read, and how
it was read. As students of history, we must be well-equipped to recognize different types of
interpretation, why these may differ from each other, and how to critically sift these
interpretations through historical evaluation. Interpretations of historical events change over
time; thus, it is an important skill for a student of history to trac these changes in an attempt to
understand the past.
With several possibilities to interpreting the past, another important concept that we must note
is multiperspectivity. This can be defined as a way of looking at historical events, personalities,
developments, cultures, and societies from different perspectives. This means that there is
multitude of ways by which we can view the world, and each could be equally valid, and at the
same time, equally partial as well. Historical writing is, by definition, biased, partial, and
contains preconceptions. With multiperspectivity as an approach in history, we must understand
that historical interpretations contain discrepancies, contradictions, ambiguities, and are often
the focus of dissent.
SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
People debating on the first mass story find it as a religious and geographical matter.
Religiously, it marks the birthplace of Christianity in the Philippines. Geographically, it
challenges the "accuracy" of Spanish narratives about the Philippine spaces and places, and
their movements between these places. Numerous debates have been made on this controversy
and it was even elevated and fought over to the Congress. Both camps persist with their claims
and they continuously challenge each other’s evidences and assertions. In March 1998,
however, the disputed issue was officially settled when the National Historical Institute (NHI)
declared Limasawa to be the site of the first catholic mass. Despite the foregoing verdict, the
pro-Masao group has not stopped from asserting its claim until today.
But as a Filipino, what is the significance of this first Eucharistic celebration issue? The value
of this controversy rests on the fact that the conduct of the first Holy Mass is associated with the
introduction of Christianity on Philippine soil. Historically, it corrects geographical distortion
contained in Philippine historiography.
THE BUTUAN TRADITION
The Butuan claim rests upon a tradition that was almost unanimous and unbroken for three
centuries, namely the 17th, the 18th and the 19th. On the strength of that tradition and
embodying it, a monument was erected in 1872 near the mouth of the Agusan River at a spot
that was then within the municipal boundaries of Butuan, but which today belongs to the
separate municipality of Magallanes, named after Ferdinand Magellan. The monument was a
brick pillar on which was a marble slab that contained an inscription which might be translated
as follows:
To the Immortal Magellan: the People of Butuan with their Parish Priest and the Spaniards
resident therein, to commemorate his arrival and the celebration of the First Mass on this site on
the 8th of April 1521. Erected in 1872, under the District Governor Jose Ma. Carvallo.
The monument was erected apparently at the instigation of the parish priest of Butuan, who at
the time was a Spanish friar of the Order of Augustinian Recollects. The date given for the first
Mass (8 April 1521) may be an obvious error, or it may be a clumsy and anachronistic attempt
to translate the original date in terms of the Gregorian calendar. In any use, that monument is a
testimonial to the tradition that remained vigorous until the end of the 19th century, namely,
that Magellan and his expedition landed at Butuan and celebrated there the first Mass ever
offered on Philippine soil.
The Butuan tradition was already in possession by the middle of the 17th century: so much so
that it was accepted without question by two Jesuit historians who otherwise were quite careful
of their facts.
One of these historians was Father Francisco Colin S.J. (1592-1660) whose Labor evangelica
was first published in Madrid in 1663, three years after his death. The work was reissued 240
years later in a magnificent three-volume edition annotated by Father Pablo Pastelis S.J.
(Madrid, 1903).
Colin had obviously read some authentic accounts of Magellan's voyage for his narration is
accurate up to the landing in Homonhon, (He spells it Humunu, as does Pigafetta.) After that,
Colin's account becomes vague, He abruptly brings Magellan to Butuan without explaining how
he got there. Then he brings him to Limasawa (which he misspells Dimasaua), and from there
the account becomes again accurate and detailed. The important thing in Colin's account as far
as our present purpose is concerned, is the fact that he represents the first Mass, as well as the
solemn planting of the cross and the formal taking possession of the Islands in the name of the
Crown of Castile, as having taken place at Butuan on Easter Sunday of 1521.
The other Jesuit writer of the mid-17th century was Father Francisco Combes S.J. (1620-1665)
who, like Colin, had lived and worked as a missionary in the Philipines, and whose Historia de
Mindanao y Jolo was printed in Madrid in 1667, two years after the author's death and five
years after Colin's work was published. Combes’ History of Mindanao was also reissued 230
years afterwards in a handsome edition edited by Wenceslao Retana assisted by Father Pastells,
In his account of Magellan's voyage, Combes gives a somewhat different version of the route
taken by the Discoverer.
For our present purpose, the main point in that account is that Magellan landed at Butuan and
there planted the cross in a solemn ceremony. Combes does not mention the first Mass. What he
mentions are the other two events which, from Pigafetta's account, had occurred on the same
day as the first Mass, namely the planting of the cross and the formal claiming of the
Archipelago on behalf of the Castilian Crown. These events, says Combes, took place at
Butuan.
THE EVIDENCE FOR LIMASAWA
I. The Evidence of Albo's Log-Book
Francisco Albo joined the Magellan expedition as a pilot ("contramaestre") in Magellan's
flagship "Trinidad". He was one of the eighteen survivors who returned with Sebastian Elcano
on the "Victoria" after having circumnavigated the world. Albo began keeping his own diary --
merely only a log-book - on the voyage out, while they were sailing southward in the Atlantic
along the coast of South America, off Brazil. His account of their entry into Philippine waters
(or, as it was then called, the archipelago of San Lazaro) . . . may be reduced to the following
points:
1. On the 16th of March (1521) as they sailed in a westerly course from the Ladrones, they
saw land towards the northwest; but owing to many shallow places they did not approach
it. They found later that its name was Yunagan.
2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island named Suluan, and
there they anchored. There they saw some canoes but these tied at the Spaniards’
approach. This island was at 9 and two-thirds degrees North latitude.
3. Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhabited island of
"Gada" where they took in a supply of wood and water. The sea around that island was
free from shallows. (Albo does not give the latitude of this island, but from Pigafetta's
testimony, this seems to be the "Acquada" or Homonhon, at 10 degrees North latitude,)
4. From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island named Seilani which was
inhabited and was known to have gold. (Seilani – or, as Pigaffeta calls it, "Ceylon" – was
the island of Leyte.)
5. Sailing southwards along the coast of that large island of Seilani, they turned southwest
to a small island called "Mazava". That island is also at a latitude of 9 and two-thirds
degrees North.
6. The people of that island of Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards planted a cross
upon a mountain-top, and from there they were shown three lands to the west and
southwest, where they were told there was much gold. "They showed us how the gold
was gathered, which came in small pieces like peas and lentils."
7. From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani. They followed the coast of
Seilani in a northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degrees of latitude where they
saw three small islands.
8. From there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and there they saw three islets, where
they dropped anchor for the night. In the morning they sailed southwest some 12 leagues,
down to a latitude of 10 and one-third degree. There they entered a channel between two
islands, one of which was called "Matan" and the other "Subu”
9. They sailed down that channel and then turned westward and anchored at the town (la
villa) of Subu where they stayed many days and obtained provisions and entered into a
peace-pact with the local king.
10.The town of Subu was on an east-west direction with the islands of Suluan and Mazava.
But between Mazava and Subu, there were so many shallows that the boats could not go
westward directly but had to go (as they did) in a round-about way.
Such is Albo 's testimony. The island that he calls Gada seems to be the acquada of Pigafetta,
namely the island of Homonhon where they took in supplies of water and wood. The large
island of Seilani which they coasted is the island of Leyte. Coasting southwards along the
eastern coast of that island, then turning southwest they came upon small island named,
Mazava, which lies at a latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees North.
That fits the location of the small island of Limasawa, south of Leyte. The island's southern tip
is at 90°54' N.
It is to be noted that Albo does not mention the first Mass, but only the planting of the cross
upon a mountain-top from which could be seen three islands to the west and southwest. This
also fits the southern end of Limasawa. It does not fit the coast of Butuan from which no islands
could be seen to the south or the southwest, but only towards the north.
II. The Evidence from Pigafetta
The most complete account of the Magellan expedition is that by Antonio Pigafetta entitled
First Voyage Around the World. Like Albo, he was a member of the expedition and was
therefore an eyewitness of the principal events which he describes, including the first Mass in
what is now known as the Philippine Archipelago, but which Magellan called the Islands of
Saint Lazarus. Of Pigafetta's work there are two excellent English translations, one by
Robertson (from the Italian) and another by Skelton (from the French).
The pertinent section in Pigafetta's account is that part in which he narrates the events from the
16th of March 1521 when they first sighted the islands of the Philippine Group, up to the 7th of
April when the expedition landed at Cebu. That was a period of approximately three weeks.
Pigafetta's Testimony Regarding the Route
The route taken by the Magellan expedition may be reconstructed if we follow Pigafetta's
account day by day. Here is a summary of his account.
1. Saturday, 16 March 1521. – Magellan's expedition sighted a "high land" named “Zama!"
Which was some 300 leagues westward of the Ladrones (now the Marianas) Islands.
2. Sunday, March 17. – "The following day" after sighting Zamal Island, they landed on
"another island which was uninhabited" and which lay "to the right" of the above-
mentioned island of “Zamal." (To the "right" here would mean on their starboard going
south or southwest.) There they set up two tents for the sick members of the crew and had
a sow killed for them. The name of this island was "Humunu” (Homonhon). This island
was located at 10 degrees North latitude.
3. On that same day (Sunday, 17 March). – Magellan named the entire archipelago the
"Islands or Saint Lazarus", the reason being that it was the Sunday in the Lenten season
when the Gospel assigned for the Mass and the liturgical Office was the eleventh chapter
of St. John, which tells of the raising of Lazarus from the dead.
4. Monday, 18 March. – In the afternoon of their second day on that island, they saw a boat
coming towards them with nine men in it. An exchange of gifts was in effected. Magellan
asked for food supplies, and the men went away, promising to bring rice and other
supplies in "four days.'
5. There were two springs of water on that island of Homonhon. Also, they saw there some
indications that there was gold in these islands. Consequently, Magellan renamed the
island and called it the " Watering Place of Good Omen" (Acquada la di bouni sr gnialli).
6. Friday, 22 March. – At noon the natives returned. This time they were in two boats. and
they brought food supplies.
7. Magellan' expedition stayed eight days at Homonhon: from Sunday, 17 March. to the
Monday of the following week, 25 March.
8. Monday, 25 March. – In the afternoon, the expedition weighed anchor and left the island
of Homonhon. In the ecclesiastical calendar, this day (25 March) was the feast-day (of
the Incarnation, also called the feast of the Annunciation and therefore "Our Lady’s
 Day." On this day, as they were about to weigh anchor, an accident happened to
Pigafetta: he fell into the water but was rescued. He attributed his narrow escape from
death as a grace obtained through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary on her
feast-day.
9. The route taken by the expedition after leaving Homonhon was "toward the west
southwest, between four islands: namely, Cenalo. Hiunanghan, lbusson and Albarien."
Very probably "Cenalo" is a misspelling in the Italian manuscript for what Pigaffeta in
his map calls "Ceilon" and Albo calls "Seilani": namely the island of Leyte.
"Hiunanghan" (a misspelling of Hinunangan) seemed to Pigafetta to be a separate island,
but it is actually on the mainland of Leyte (i.e. "Ceylon"). On the other hand, Hibuson
(Pigafetta's lbusson) is an island east of Leyte's southern tip.
Thus, it is easy to see what Pigafetta meant by sailing "toward the west southwest” past
those islands. They left Homonhon sailing westward towards Leyte, then followed the
Leyte coast south yard, passing between the island of Hibuson on their portside and
Hiunangan Bay on their starboard, and then continued southward, then turning westward
to "Mazaua".
10. Thursday, 28 March. – In the morning of Holy Thursday, they anchored off an island
where the previous night they had
11. They remained seven days on Mazaua Island. What they did during those seven days, we
shall discuss in a separate section below, entitled "Seven Days at Mazaua.”
12. Thursday, 4 April. – They left Mazaua, bound for Cebu. They were guided thither by the
king of Mazaua who sailed in his own boat. Their route took them past five "islands":
namely: "Ceylon, Bohol, Canighan, Baibai, and Catighan.
Pigafetta thought that Ceylon and Baibai were separate islands. Actually, they were parts
of the same island of Leyte. "Canighan" (Canigao in our maps) is an island off the
southwestem tip of Leyte. They sailed from Mazaua west by northwest into the Canigao
Channel, with Bohol Island to port and Leyte and Canigao Islands to starboard. Then they
sailed northwards along the Leyte coast, past Baibai to "Gatighan". The identity of
Gatighan is not certain. But we are told that it was twenty leagues from Mazaua and
fifteen leagues from "Subu" (Cebu).
13. At Gatighan, they sailed westward to the three islands of the Camotes Group, namely,
Poro, Pasihan and Ponson. (Pigafetta calls them "Polo, Ticobon, and Pozon.") Here the
Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of Mazaua to catch up with them, since the
Spanish ships were much faster than the native balanghai — a thing that excited the
admiration of the king of Mazaua.
14. From the Camotes Islands they sailed [southwestward] towards "Zubu".
15. Sunday, 7 April. – At noon on Sunday, the 7th of April, they entered the harbor of
"Zubu" (Cebu). It had taken them three days to negotiate the journey from Mazaua
northwards to the Camotes Islands and then southwards to Cebu.
That is the route of the Magellan expedition as described by Pigafetta. It coincides substantially
and in most details with the route as described in Albo's, log. In that route, the southermost
point reached before getting to Cebu was Mazaua, situated at nine and two-thirds degrees North
latitude.
The question may now be asked: Could this "Mazaua" have be Butuan? Or more precisely,
could it have been the "Masao" beach in the Agusan River delta, near Butuan?
Seven Days at Mazaua
In that island of “Mazaua" — which according to both Pigafetta and Albo was situated at a
latitude of nine and two-thirds degrees North - the Magellan expedition stayed a week. "We
remained there seven days," says Pigafetta. What did they do during those seven days?
Was it possible (as some writers have suggested) that the expedition left Mazaua, went south to
Butuan, offered Mass there, and then returned to Mazaua before proceeding to Cebu?
The answer must be sought in Pigafetta's day-by-day account of those seven days. Here is the
summary of his account:
1. Thursday, 28 March. – In the morning they anchored near an island where they had seen
a light the night before. A small boat (boloto) came with eight natives, to whom Magellan
threw some trinkets as presents. The natives paddled away, but two hours later two large
boats (balanghai) came, in one of which the native king sat under an awning of mats. At
Magellan's invitation some of the natives went up the Spanish ship, but the native king
remained seated in his boat. An exchange of gifts was effected. In the afternoon of that
day, the Spanish ships weighed anchor and came closer to shore, anchoring near the
native king's village. This Thursday, 28 March, was Thursday in Holy Week: i.e., Holy
Thursday.
2. Friday, 29 March. – "Next day. Holy Friday, " Magellan sent his slave interpreter ashore
in a small boat to ask the king if he could provide the expedition with food supplies, and
to say that they had come as friends and not as enemies. In reply the king himself came in
a boat with six or eight men, and this time went up to Magellan’s ship and the two men
embraced. Another exchange of gifts was made. The native king and his companions
returned ashore, bringing with them two members of Magellan’s expedition as guests for
the night. One of the two was Pigafetta.
3. Saturday, 30 March. – Pigafetta and his companion had spent the previous evening
feasting and drinking with the native king and his son. Pigafetta deplored the fact that,
although it was Good Friday, they had to eat meat. The following morning (Saturday)
Pigafetta and his companion took leave of their hosts and returned to the ships.
4. Sunday, 31 March. – “Early in the morning of Sunday, the last of March and Easter day,”
Magellan sent the priest ashore with some men to prepare for the Mass. Later in the
morning, Magellan landed with some fifty men and Mass was celebrated, after which a
cross was venerated. Magellan and the Spaniards returned to the ship for the noon-day
meal, but in the afternoon, they returned ashore to plant the cross on the summit of the
highest hill. In attendance both at the Mass and at the planting of the cross were the king
of Mazaua and the king of Butuan.
5. Sunday, 31 March. – On that same afternoon, while on the summit of the highest hill,
Magellan asked the two kings which ports he should go to in order to obtain more
abundant supplies of food than were available in that island. They replied that there were
three ports to choose from: Ceylon, Zubu and Calagan. Of the three, Zubu was the port
with the most trade. Magellan then said that he wished to go to Zubu and to depart the
following morning. He asked for someone to guide him thither. The kings replied that the
pilots would be available "any time." But later that evening the king of Mazaua changed
his mind and said that he would himself conduct Magellan to Zubu but that he would first
have to bring the harvest in. He asked Magellan to send him men to help with the harvest.
6. Monday, 1 April. – Magellan sent men ashore to help with the harvest, but no work was
done that day because the two kings were sleeping off their drinking bout of the night
before.
7. Tuesday, 2 April, and Wednesday, 3 April. – Work on the harvest during the "next two
days", i.e. Tuesday and Wednesday, the 2nd and 3rd of April.
8. Thursday, 4 April. – They leave Mazaua, bound for Cebu.
"We remained there seven days," says Pigafetta. Every day is accounted for. The Mass on
Easter Sunday was celebrated on that island of Mazaua, and not in Butuan or elsewhere.
III. Summary of the Evidence of Albo and Pigafetta
Taking the evidence of Albo's log-book together with that from Pigafetta's account, we may
take the following points as established:
1. Magellan's expedition entered Philippine waters south of the island of Samar and towards
Leyte and then southwards parallel to the eastern coast of that island and that of the
adjoining island of Panaon. Rounding the southern tip of the latter, they anchored off the
 eastern shore of a small island called Mazaua. There they stayed a week, during which on
Easter Sunday they celebrated Mass and planted the cross on the summit of the highest
hill.
2. The island of Mazaua lies at a latitude of nine and two-thirds degrees North. Its position
(south of Leyte) and its latitude correspond to the position and latitude of the island of
Limasawa, whose southern tip lies at 9 degrees and 54 minutes North.
3. From Mazaua, the expedition sailed northwestwards through the Canigao channel
between Bohol and Leyte, then northwestwards parallel to the eastern coast of this latter
island, then they sailed westward to the Camotes Group and from there southwestwards
to Cebu.
4. At no point in that itinerary did the Magellan expedition go to Butuan or other point on
the Mindanao coast. The survivors of the expedition did go to Mindanao later, but after
MagelIan's death.
IV. Confirmatory Evidence of Legazpi Expedition
There is confirmatory evidence from the documents of the Legazpi expedition, which sailed
into Philippine waters in 1565, forty-four years after Magellan. One of the places that Legazpi
and his pilots were anxious to visit was precisely Mazaua, and to this end they inquired about
"Mazaua" from Camotuan and his companions, natives of the village of Cabalian at the
southeastern end of the island of Leyte. Guided by these natives, the Legazpi ships rounded the
island of "Panae" (Panaon), which was separated from Leyte by a narrow strait, and anchored
off "Mazaua” – but they found the inhabitants to be hostile, apparently as a result of Portuguese
depredations that had occurred in the four-decade interval between the Legazpi and the
Magellan expeditions.
From Mazaua, they went to Camiguing (which was visible from Mazaua), and from there they
intended to go to Butuan on the island of "Vindanao" but were driven instead by contrary winds
to Bohol. It was only later that a small contingent of Spaniards, in a small vessel, managed to go
to Butuan.
The point seems clear: As pilots of the Legazpi expedition understood it, Mazaua was an island
near Leyte and Panaon; Butuan was on the island of Mindanao. The two were entirely different
places and in no wise identical.
Cavite Mutiny
The Cavity Mutiny was one of the incidents in the annals of Philippine history that had several
conflicts. In comparison to this incident, various sources indicate that each account has different
sides of the narrative. Significantly, those who lived at the time of the incident (first-hand
accounts) and those who obtained their data from contemporaries of the events or who, because
of their connection with those men (second-hand accounts), composed the accounts.
The re-examination of whose "story" is more factual and accurate about Cavite Mutiny is very
important and critical, as this incident led to the martyrdom of the three priests (GOMBURZA)
and led to the Philippine Revolution of 1898. However, of all the accounts, John Schumacher
(1972), who carried out a comprehensive re-examination of the main and secondary records of
the case, points to two credible and accurate records. One is that of Trinidad Hermenigildo
Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and writer, and the other is that of José Montero y Vidal, a
prolific Spanish historian.
According to Schumacher, "the account of Pardo de Tavera, prescinding from the emotional
anti-friar tone that pervades it, gives evidence of being the most reliable, even though fairly
general, account except for its failure to recognize that De la Torre had also been suspicious of
the Filipino reformists. That of Montero, apart from its anti-Filipino tone and its supposition of
a revolutionary conspiracy, contains the most details and, to all appearances, most reliable
account of the actual course of the revolt itself, as well as of the execution of the three priests.”
In this sense, the following accounts of Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, Jose Montero y Vidal and the
Official Record of Governor Izquierdo on the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 were considered for this
reading. These people vary because they viewed the mutiny for various reasons. In evaluating
this case, each of them used his or her own benchmark and each reader is asked to closely
discriminate against their statements and facts.
Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872
By Jose Montero y Vidal
The Spaniard Montero y Vidal wrote a version of the Cavite Mutiny which appeared in his book
Historia General de Filipinas (Madrid, 1895, Vol. III, pp. 566-595.). Understandably the
narration of the event showed a pro-Spanish bias that one of his critics Dr. T. H. Pardo de
Tavera commented that he, "in narrating the Cavite episode, does not speak as a historian; he
speaks as a Spaniard bent on perverting the facts at his pleasure; he is mischievously partial."
He further said that the narration was unsupported by documentary evidence and Montero y
Vidal exaggerated the mutiny of a few disgruntled native soldiers and laborers into a revolt to
overthrow Spanish rule - a seditious movement - and involved the innocent Filipino patriotic
leaders including Fathers Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora, Jose Ma. Basa, Antonio Ma. Regidor,
Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, and others. This shows the difference of perspectives of a colonist and
a colonizer. Montero y Vidal's version of the Cavite episode of 1872 in English translation
follows:
With the establishment in Spain of a government less radical than the one that appointed La
Torre, the latter was relieved from his post. His successor D. Rafael de Izquierdo, assumed
control of the government of these islands April 4, 1871. The most eventful episode in his rule
was the Cavite revolt of 1872.
The abolition of the privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from
the tribute was, according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were, however, other
causes.
The spanish revolution which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on by an
unbridled press against monarchical principles, attentatory of the most sacred respects towards
the dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and pamphlets; the speeches and
preachings of the apostles of these new ideas in Spain; the outbursts of the American publicists
and the criminal policy of the senseless Governor whom the Revolutionary government sent to
govern the Philippines, and who put into practice these ideas were the determining
circumstances which gave rise, among certain Filipinos, to the idea of attaining their
independence. It was towards this goal that they started to work, with the powerful assistance of
a certain section of the native clergy, who0 out of spite toward the friars, made common cause
with the enemies of the mother country.
At various time but especially in the beginning of the year 1872, the authorities received
anonymous communications with the information that a great uprising would break out against
the Spaniards, the minute the fleet at Cavite left for the South, and that all would be
assassinated, including the friars. But nobody gave importance to these notices. The conspiracy
had been going on since the days of La Torre with utmost secrecy. At times, the principal
leaders met either in the house of the Filipino Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, or in that
of the native priest, Jacinto Zamora, and these meetings were usually attended by the curate of
Bacoor (Cavite), the soul of the movement, whose energetic character and immense wealth
enabled him to exercise a strong influence.
The garrison of Manila, composed mostly of native soldiers, were involved in this conspiracy,
as well as a multitude of civilians. The plan was for the soldiers to assassinate their officers, the
servants, their masters, and the escort of the Captain-General at Malacañang, to dispose of the
governor himself. The friars and other Spaniards were later to have their turn. The pre-
concerted signal among the conspirators of Cavite and Manila was the firing of rockets from the
walls of the city. The details having been arranged; it was agreed that the uprising was to break
out in the evening of the 20th of January, 1872. Vari1Ous circumstances, however, which might
well be considered as providential, upset the plans, and made the conspiracy a dismal failure.
In the district of Sampaloc, the fiesta of the patron saint, the Virgin of Loreto, was being
celebrated with pomp and splendor. On the night of the 20th, fireworks were displayed and
rockets fired into the air. Those in Cavite mistook these for the signal to revolt, and at nine-
thirty in the evening of that day two hundred native soldiers under the leadership of Sergeant La
Madrid rose up in arms, assassinated the commander of the fort and wounded his wife.
The military governor of Cavite, D. Fernando Rojas, dispatched two Spaniards to inform the
Manila authorities of the uprising but they were met on the way by a group of natives,
belonging to the Guias established by LaTorre, who put them instantly to death. At about the
same time, an employee of the arsenal, D. Domingo Mijares, left Cavite in a war vessel for
Manila, arriving there at midnight. He informed the commandant of Marine of what had
occurred, and this official immediately relayed the news to Governor Izquierdo.
Early the next morning two regiments, under the command of D. Felipe Ginoves, segundo cabo,
left for Cavite on board the merchant vessels Filipino, Manila, Isabela I and Isabela II. Ginoves
demanded rendition and waited the whole day of the 21st for the rebels to surrender, without
ordering the assault of their positionin order to avoid unnecessary shedding of blood. After
waiting the whole day in vain for the rendition of the rebels, Ginoves launched an assault
against the latter's position, early in the morning of the 22nd, putting to the sword the majority
of
the rebels and making prisoners of the rest. On the same day an official proclamation
announced the suppression of the revolt.
As a result of the declarations made by some of the prisoners in which several individuals were
pointed out as instigators, Don Jose Burgos and D. Jacinto Zamora, curates of the Cathedral, D.
Mariano Gomez, curate of Bacoor (Cavite), several other Filipino priests, D. Antonio Maria
Regidor, lawyer and Regidor of the Ayuntamiento, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Consejero de
Administracion, Pedro Carillo, Gervasio Sanchez and Jose Mauricio de Leon, lawyer Enrique
Paraiso and Jose and Pio Basa, employees, and Crisanto Reyes, Maximo Paterno and several
other Filipinos, were arrested.
The council of war, which from the beginning took charge of the causes in connection with the
Cavite uprising, passed the sentence of death on forty-one of the rebels. On the 27th of January
the Captain-General fixed his "cumplase" on the sentence. On the 6th of the following month,
eleven more were sentenced to death, but the Governor General, by decree of the day following,
commuted this sentence to life imprisonment. On the 8th, the sentence of death was pronounced
on Camerino and ten years imprisonment of eleven individuals of the famous "Guias de la
Torre," for the assassination of the Spaniards who, on the night of January 20th, were sent to
Manila to carry news of the uprising.
The same council on the 15th of February, sentenced to die by strangulation the Filipino priests,
D. Jose Burgos, D. Jacinto Zamora and D. Mariano Gomez, and Francisco Saldua; and Maximo
Inocencio, Enrique Paraiso and Crisanto de los Reyes to ten years imprisonment. Early in the
morning of the seventeenth of February, an immense multitude appeared on the field of
Bagumbayan to witness the execution of the sentence. The attending force was composed of
Filipino troops, and the batteries of the fort were aimed the place of execution, ready to fire
upon the least sign of uprising. Gomez was executed first, then Zamora, then Burgos, and lastly,
Saldua.
On the 3rd of April, 1872, the Audiencia suspended from the practice of law the following men:
D. Jose Basa y Enriquez, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, D. Antonio Ma. Regidor, D. Pedro
Carillo, D. Gervasio Sanchez and D. Jose Mauricio de Leon.
Izquierdo had requested the sending to Manila of Spanish troops for the defense of the fort as
most of those found here were natives. In pursuance of Izquierdo's request, the government, by
decree of April 4, 1872, dissolved the native regiment of artillery and ordered the creation of an
artillery force to be composed exclusively of Peninsulares. The latter arrived in Manila in July,
1872. On the occasion of the arrival of the troops, the Sto. Domingo Church celebrated a special
mass at which high officials of the Government, the religious corporations, and the general
public, attended, upon invitation by the Governor and Captain-General of the Philippines
Filipino Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872
By Dr. T.H. Pardo de Tavera
The Filipino version of the Cavite Mutiny was provided by Dr. Trinidad Hermnegildo Pardo de
Tavera, a contemporary of Jose Rizal. Pardo de Tavera was a scholar, scientist, and historical
researcher. He had written a work on the Mardicas of Cavite and like Rizal, he conducted a
research on the past of the Filipinos before the arrival of the Spanish colonizers. During the
early years of the American rule he served as a member of Taft's Philippine Commission and
founded the Federal Party. He died in Manila on March 26, 1925, aged 68. According to him
the Cavite Mutiny was merely a protest against the harsh polices of Governor General Rafael de
Izquierdo. This was used as a pretext by the conservative Spaniards to launch an all-out
elimination of the Filipino liberals and secular priests who were bent on replacing them from
the center of Filipino society. The following was his account of the Mutiny:
The arrival of General Izquierdo (1871-1873) was the signal for a complete change in the aspect
of affairs. The new governor soon made it clear that his views were different from those of La
Torre - that there would be no change in the established form of government - and he at once
announced that he intended to govern the people "with a crucifix in one hand and a sword in the
other."
His first official act was to prohibit the founding of a school of arts and trades, which was being
organized by the efforts and funds raised by the natives of good standing in the community, but
the founding of which did not tally with the views of the religious orders. Governor Izquierdo
believed that the establishment of the new school was merely a pretext for the organization of a
political club, and he not only did not allow it to be opened but made a public statement
accusing the Filipinos who had charge of the movement. All of those who had offered their
support to ex- Governor La Torre were classed as personas sospechosas (suspects), a term that
since that time has been used in the Philippine Islands to designate any person who refused to
servilely obey the wishes and whims of the authorities. The conservative element in the islands
now directed the governmental policy, and the educated Filipinos fell more and more under the
displeasure and suspicion of the governor.
The peace of the colony was broken by a certain incident which, though unimportant in itself,
was probably the origin of the political agitation which, constantly growing for thirty years,
culminated in the overthrow of the Spanish sovereignty in the Philippine Islands. From time
immemorial the workmen in the arsenal at Cavite and in the barracks of the artillery and
engineer corps had been exempt from the payment of the tribute tax and from obligation to
work certain days each year on public improvements. General Izquierdo believed the time
opportune for abolishing these privileges and ordered that in the future all such workmen should
pay tribute and labor on public improvements. This produced great dissatisfaction among the
workmen affected and the men employed in the arsenal at Cavite went on a strike, but, yielding
to pressure and threats made by the authorities, they subsequently returned to their labors.
The workmen in the Cavite arsenal were all natives of that town and of the neighboring town of
San Roque. In a short while the dissatisfaction and discontent with the government spread all
over that section and even the entire troops became disaffected. On the night of January 20,
1872, there was an uprising among the soldiers in the San Felipe fort, in Cavite, and the
commanding officer and other Spanish officers in charge of the fort were assassinated. Forty
marines attached to the arsenal and 22 artillerymen under Sergeant La Madrid took part in this
uprising, and it was believed that the entire garrison in Cavite was disaffected and probably
implicated. But if the few soldiers who precipitated the attack believed they would be supported
by the bulk of the army and that a general rebellion against Spain would be declared in the
islands, they were deceived. When the news of the uprising was received in Manila, General
Izquierdo sent the commanding general to Cavite, who reinforced the native troops, took
possession of the fort, and put the rebels to the sword. Sergeant La Madrid has been blinded and
badly burned by the explosion of a sack of powder and, being unable to escape, was also cut
down. A few of the rebels were captured and taken to Manila and there was no further
disturbance of the peace or insubordination of any kind.
This uprising among the soldiers in Cavite was used as a powerful lever by the Spanish
residents and by the friars. During the time that General La Torre was chief executive in the
Philippine Islands the influential Filipinos did not hesitate to announce their hostility to the
religious orders, and the Central Government in Madrid had announced its intention to deprive
the friars in these islands of all powers of intervention in matters of civil government and of the
direction and management of the management of the university. Moret, the colonial minister,
had drawn up a scheme of reforms by which he proposed to make a radical change in the
colonial system of government which was to harmonize with the principles for which the
revolution in Spain had been fought. It was due to these facts and promises that the Filipinos
had great hopes of an improvement in the affairs of their country, while the friars, on the other
hand, feared that their power in the colony would soon be completely a thing of the past.
The mutiny in Cavite gave the conservative element - that is, those who favored a continuation
of the colonial modus vivendi an opportunity to represent to the Spanish Government that a vast
conspiracy was afoot and organized throughout the archipelago with the object of destroying
the Spanish sovereignty. They stated that the Spanish Government in Madrid was to blame for
the propagation of pernicious doctrines and for the hopes that had been held out from Madrid to
the Filipino people, and also because of the leanings of ex-Governor La Tone and of other
public functionaries who had been sent to the Philippine Islands by the Government that
succeeded Queen Isabella. The fall of the new rulers in Spain within a few days, as well as other
occurrences, seemed to accentuate the claims made by the conservative element in the
Philippine Islands regarding the peril which threatened Spanish sovereignty in the islands; it
appeared as though the prophecies were about to be fulfilled. The Madrid authorities were not
able to combat public opinion in that country, no opportunity was given nor time taken to make
a thorough investigation of the real facts or extent of the alleged revolution; the conservative
element in the Philippine Islands painted the local condition of affairs in somber tints; and the
Madrid Government came to believe, or at least to suspect, that a scheme was being concocted
throughout the islands to shake off Spanish sovereignty. Consistent with the precedents of their
colonial rule, the repressive measures adopted to quell the supposed insurrection were strict and
sudden. No attempt appears to have been made to ascertain whether or not the innocent suffered
with the guilty, and the only end sought appeared to be to inspire terror in the minds of all by
making examples of a certain number, so that none in the future should attempt, nor even dream
of any attempt at secession.
Many of the best known Filipinos were denounced to the military authorities, and they the sons
of Spaniards born in the islands and men of mixed blood (Spanish and Chinese), as well as the
Indians of pure blood, as the Philippine Malays were called, were persecuted and punished
without distinction by the military authorities.
Those who dared to oppose themselves to the friars were punished with special severity, among
others may be mentioned the priests Burgos, a half-blood Spaniard, Zamora, a half-blood
Chinaman, and Gomez, a pure-blood Tagalog, who had vigorously opposed the friars in the
litigation over the curacies in the various provinces. The three priests mentioned were
condemned to death by a military court-martial; and Antonio M. Regidor, a lawyer and
councilman of Manila, Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, lawyer and member of the administrative
council, P. Mendoza, curate of Santa Cruz, Guevarra, curate of Quiapo, the priests Mariano
Sevilla, Feliciano Gomez, Ballesteros, Jose Basa, the lawyers Carillo, Basa, Enriquez, Crisanto
Reyes, Maximo Paterno, and many others were sentenced to life imprisonment on the Marianas
Islands. The Government thus secured its object of terrorizing the Filipino people, but the
punishments meted out were not only unjust but were from every point of view unnecessary, as
there had not been the remote intention on the part of anyone to overthrow the Spanish
sovereignty. On the contrary, the attitude of Moret, Labra, Becerra, and other high officials in
the Madrid Government had awakened in the breasts of the Filipinos a lively friendship for the
home government, and never had the ties which bound the colony to Spain been as close as they
were during the short interval between the arrival of General La Torre and the time when
General Izquierdo, in the name of the home government, was guilty of the atrocities mentioned
above, of which innocent men were made victims.
A careful study of the history and documents of that time brings to light the part which the
religious orders played in that sad'drama. One of the results of the so-called revolution of Cavite
was to strengthen the power of the friars in the Philippine Islands in such manner that the
Madrid Government, which up to that time had contemplated reducing the power of the
religious orders in these islands, was obliged not only to abandon its intention, but to place a yet
greater measure of official influences at the service of the friars, and from that time they were
considered as an important factor in the preservation of the Spanish sovereignty in the colony.
This influnce was felt throughout the islands, and not only were the friars taken into the
confidence of the Government, but the Filipino people looked upon the religious orders as their
real masters and as the representatives, powerful and unsparing, of the Spanish Kingdom.
But there were other results following upon the unfortunate policy adopted by Governor
Izquierdo. Up to that time there had been no intention of secession from Spain, and the only
aspiration of the people was to secure the material and educational advancement of the country.
The Filipino people had never blamed the Spanish nation for the backward condition in which
the Islands existed, nor for the injustices committed in the islands by the Spanish officials; but
on the contrary it was the custom to lay all the blame for these things on the individual officers
guilty of maladministration, and no attempt had been made to investigate whether or not the
evils under which the islands suffered were due to fundamental causes. The persecutions which
began under Governor Izquierdo were based on the false assumption that the Filipino people
were desirous of independence, and although this was an unfounded accusation, there were
many martyrs to the cause, among whom were found many of the most intelligent and well-to-
do people, without distinction of color or race or nationality, who were sentenced to death, to
imprisonment, or were expatriated because they were believed to aspire to the independence of
these islands. The fear which the people felt of the friars and of the punishments meted out by
the Government was exceeded only by the admiration which the Filipino people had for those
who did not hesitate to stand up for the rights of the country in this manner the persecutions to
which the people were subjected served as a stimulus and an educative force, and from that time
the rebellion was nursed in secret and the passive resistance to the abuses of the official power
became greater day by day.
No attempt was made to allay the ill-feeling which existed between the Filipinos and the
Spaniards, especially the friars, caused by the mutiny in Cavite and the cruel manner in which
the punishment was meted out. Many years would have been necessary to heal the wounds felt
by the large number of families whose members were made the victims of the unjust sentences
of the military courts-martial. Nothing was done by the Government to blot out the recollection
of these actions; on the contrary, it appeared to be its policy to continually bring up the memory
of these occurrences as a reminder to the malcontents of what they had to expect; but the only
thing accomplished was to increase the popular discontent. It was from that time that every
disagreement between the Spaniards and Filipinos, however trivial, was given a racial or
political character; everytime a friar was insulted or injured in any way, it was claimed to be an
act of hostility to the Spanish nation.
Official Report of Governor Izquierdo on the Cavite Mutiny
Rafael Izquierdo
Governor General Rafael Izquierdo reported to the Spanish Minister of War, dated Manila,
January 23, 1872, blaming the Cavite Mutiny on the native clergy, some local residents,
intellectuals, and even El Eco Filipino, a Madrid-based reformist newspaper. Significantly, he
calls the military mutiny as "insurrection", an "uprising", and a "revolution". The text of the
report is as follows:
From the summary of information received - that is, from the declaration made before the fiscal
- it seems definite that the insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the
mestizos and native lawyers, and by those known here as abogadillos. Some are residents of
Manila, others from Cavite, and some from the nearby provinces.
The instigators, to carry out their criminal project, protested against the injustice of the
government in not paying the provinces for their tobacco crop, and against the usury that some
(officials) practice in (handling) documents that the Finance department gives crop owners who
have to sell them at a loss. They encouraged the rebellion by protesting what they called the
injustice of having obliged the workers in the Cavite arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1
(1872) and to render personal service, from which they were formerly exempted.
To seduce the native troops, they resorted to superstitions with which the indios are so prone to
believe; persuading them that the Chief of State (hari) would be an ecclesiastic and the rest or
the clergy who baked the uprising would celebrate daily for its success. Thus the rebellion could
not fail because God was with them; and those who would not revolt they would kill im
nediately. Taking advantage of the ignorance of those classes and the propensity of the Indio to
steal, they offered to those who revolted) the wealth of the Spaniards and of the regular clergy,
employment and ranks in the army, and to this effect they said that fifteen native batallions
would be created, in which the soldiers who revolted would have jobs as officers and chiefs.
The lawyers and abogadillos would direct the affairs of government of the administration and of
justice.
Up to now it has not been clearly determined if they planned to establish a monarchy or a
republic, because the indios have no word in their language to describe this different form of
government, whose head in Tagalog would be called hari; but it turns out that they would place
at the head of the government a priest; and there were great probabilities - nay, a certainty that
the head selected would be D. Jose Burgos, or D. Zacinto Zamora, parish priests of S. San
Pedro of Manila.
All the Spaniards, including the friars, would be executed except for the women; and their
belongings confiscated. Foreigners would be respected.
This uprising has roots, and with them were affiliated to a great extent the regiments of infantry
and artillery, many civilians and a large number of mestizos, indios and some illustrados from
the provinces.
To start the revolution, they planned to set fire to the district of Tondo. Once the fire was set
and while the authorities were busy putting it out, the regiment of artillery with the help of the
part of the infantry would seize Fort Santiago of this Capital (they would then) fire cannons to
inform the rebels of Cavite (of their success). The rebels in Cavite counted on the artillery
detachment that occupied the fort and on the navy helped by 500 natives led by the pardoned
leader Camerino. This person and his men, located at the town of Bacoor and separated from
the fort of San Felipe by a small arm of the sea, would cross the water and reach the fort where
they would find arms and ammunition.
The rebels in Cavite) made the signals agreed upon by means of lanterns, but the native
civilians (in Bacoor) although they tried it, failed because if the vigilance of the (Spanish) navy
that had placed there a gunboat and armed vessels.
Loyalists who went to arrest the parish priests of Bacoor found an abandoned vessel loaded
with arms, including carbines and revolvers.
The uprising should have started in Manila at mignight abetted by those in Cavite, but the rebels
of this city went ahead of time. The civil-military governor of Cavite and the commanders of
Regiment 7 took very timely precautions; they knew how to keep the soldiers loyal (although
these hadd been compromised) and behaved with valor and gallantry, obliging the rebels to take
refuge in the fort of San Felipe.
Such is your Excellency, the plan of the rebels, those who guided them, and the means they
counted upon for its realization. For a long time now, through confidential information and
others of a vaguer character, I have been told that since 1869 - taking advantage of a group that
had left behind plans for an uprising, but was carried out because of the earthquake of 1862 -
there existed in Manila a junta or center that sought and found followers; and that as a pretext
they had established a society for the teaching of arts and trades. Months ago I suspended it
indirectly, giving an account to Your Excellency in my confidential report No. 113 dated
August 1, (1871) to which Your Excellency has not yet replied.
It has also been said that this center or junta received inspiration from Madrid, where
newspapers of advanced ideas flourish; to sustain them subscriptions are (locally) solicited; in
effect, newspapers such as El Eco Filipino 'were sent here from Madrid, which were distribted
by persons now imprisoned, whose articles thundered against everything that be found here.
As in the case of my worthy predecessor, I have continously received anonymous letters,but
because I was confident that I could put down and punish any uprising, I gave no credit (to
these reports) in order not to cause alarm; and instead continued a vigilant watch whenever
possible within the limited means at my command. I had everything ready (for any untoward
possibility), taking into account the limited peninsular force which composes the army.