Readings in Philippine History: Module 3 Contents/ Lessons
Readings in Philippine History: Module 3 Contents/ Lessons
Readings in Philippine History: Module 3 Contents/ Lessons
READINGS IN PHILIPPINE
HISTORY
Module 3: Content and Contextual Analysis
of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine History pt. 2
IT1/HRS1
Teacher: Mrs. Emelia J. Romano
Learning Objectives:
• To familiarize oneself with the primary documents in different historical
periods of the Philippines.
• To learn history through primary sources.
• To properly interpret primary sources through examining the content and
context of the document.
• To understand the context behind each selected document.
"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 and 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 he 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."
"And finally, it was unanimously resolved that this Nation, independent from
this day, 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."
• The Treaty of Paris was an agreement signed between Spain and the United
States of America regarding the ownership of the Philippine Islands and
other Spanish colonies in South America. The agreement ended the short-
lived Spanish-American War. The Treaty was signed on 10 December 1898,
six months after the revolutionary government declared the Philippine
Independence. The Philippines was sold to the United States at $20 million
and effectively undermined the sovereignty of the Filipinos after their
revolutionary victory. The Americans occupied the Philippines immediately
which resulted in the Philippine-American War that lasted until the earliest
years of the twentieth century.
The point is, even official records and documents like the proclamation of
independence, while truthful most of the time, still exude the politics and biases
of whoever is in power. This manifests in the selectiveness of information that can
be found in these records. It is the task of the historian, thus, to analyze the content
of these documents in relation to the dominant politics and the contexts of
people and institutions surrounding it. This tells us a lesson on taking primary
sources like official government records within the circumstance of this
production. Studying one historical subject, thus, entails looking at multiple
primary sources and pieces of historical evidences in order to have a more
nuanced and contextual analysis of our past.
Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered
away from classical art by exaggerating human features and poking fun at its
subjects. Such art genre and technique became a part of the print media as a
form of social and political commentary, which usually targets persons of power
and authority. Cartoons became an effective tool of publicizing opinions through
heavy use of symbolism, which is different from a verbose written editorial and
opinion pieces. 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.
The second cartoon was also published by The Independent on 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 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 selected cartoons illustrate not only the opinion of certain media outfits
about the Philippine society during the American period but also paint a broad
image of society and politics under the United States. In the arena of politics, for
example, we see the price that Filipinos paid for the democracy modeled after
the Americans. First, it seemed that the Filipino politicians at that time did not
understand well enough the essence of democracy and the accompanying
democratic institutions and processes. This can be seen in the rising dynastic
politics in Tondo as depicted in the cartoon published by The Independent.
Patronage also became influential and powerful, not only between clients and
patrons but also between the newly formed political parties composed of the
elite and the United States. This was depicted in the cartoon where the United
States, represented by Uncle Sam, provided dole outs for members of the
Federalista while the Nacionalista politicians looked on and waited for their turn.
Thus, the essence of competing political parties to enforce choices among the
Lastly, the cartoons also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the
Philippines now governed by the United States. From the looks of it, nothing much
has changed. For example, a cartoon depicted how police authorities oppress
petty Filipino criminals while turning a blind eye on hoarders who monopolize
goods in their huge warehouses (presumably Chinese merchants). The other
cartoon depicts how Americans controlled Filipinos through seemingly harmless
American objects. By controlling their consciousness and mentality, Americans
got to control and subjugate Filipinos.
She then told of Ninoy's character, conviction, and resolve in opposing the
authoritarianism of Marcos. She talked of the three times that they lost Ninoy
including his demise on 23 August 1983. The first time was when the dictatorship
detained Ninoy with other dissenters. Cory related:
"The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked
him up in a tiny, nearly airless cell in a military camp in the north. They
stripped him naked and held a threat of a sudden midnight execution over
his head. Ninoy held up manfully under all of it. I barely did as well. For forty-
three days, the authorities would not tell me what had happened to him.
This was the first time my children and I felt we had lost him."
Cory continued that when Ninoy survived that first detention, he was then
charged of subversion, murder, and other crimes. He was tried by a military court,
whose legitimacy Ninoy adamantly questioned. To solidify his protest, Ninoy
decided to do a hunger strike and fasted for 40 days. Cory treated this event as
the second time that their family lost Ninoy. She said:
"When that didn't work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder and a
host of other crimes before a military commission. Ninoy challenged its
authority and went on a fast. If he survived it, then he felt God intended him
Ninoy's death was the third and the last time that Cory and their children
lost Ninoy. She continued:
"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 and the
courage and faith by which alone they could be free again. The dictator
had called him a nobody. Yet, two million people threw aside their passivity
and fear and escorted him to his grave.”
"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."
Cory talked about her miraculous victory through the people's struggle and
continued talking about her earliest initiatives as the president of a restored
democracy. She stated that she intended to forge and draw reconciliation after
a bloody and polarizing dictatorship. Cory emphasized the importance of the
EDSA Revolution in terms of being a "limited revolution that respected the life and
freedom of every Filipino." She also boasted of the restoration of a fully
constitutional government whose constitution gave utmost respect to the Bill of
Rights. She reported to the U.S. Congress:
Cory then proceeded on her peace agenda with the existing communist
insurgency, aggravated by the dictatorial and authoritarian measure of
Ferdinand Marcos. She asserted:
Cory then turned to the controversial topic of the Philippine foreign debt
amounting to $26 billion at the time of her speech. This debt had ballooned during
the Marcos regime. Cory expressed her intention to honor those debts despite
mentioning that the people did not benefit from such debts. Thus, she mentioned
her protestations about the way the Philippines was deprive of choices to pay
those debts within the capacity of the Filipino people. She lamented:
“Finally may I turn to that other slavery, our twenty-six billion dollar foreign
debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet, the means by which we shall
be able to do so are kept from us. Many of the conditions imposed on the
previous government that stole this debt, continue to be imposed on us
who never benefited from it."
She continued that while the country had experienced the calamities
brought about by the corrupt dictatorship of Marcos, no commensurate
assistance was yet to be extended to the Philippines. She even remarked that
given the peaceful character of EDSA People Power Revolution, "ours must have
been the cheapest revolution ever." She demonstrated that Filipino
Cory related to the U.S. legislators that wherever she went, she met poor
and unemployed Filipinos willing to offer their lives for democracy. She stated:
"Has there been a greater test of national commitment to the ideals you
hold dear than that my people have gone through? You have spent many
lives and much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant
to receive it. And here, you have a people who want it by themselves and
need only the help to preserve it."
Cory ended her speech by thanking America for serving as home to her
family for what she referred to as the "three happiest years of our lives together."
She enjoined America in building the Philippines as a new home for democracy
and in turning the country as a "shining testament of our two nations' commitment
to freedom."
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 of her predecessor by expressing her commitment
to a democratic constitution drafted by an independent commission. She
claimed that such 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 lnsurgency 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 communist rebels to the mainstream
Philippine society). Cory claimed that her main approach to this problem was
through peace 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 Marcos'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 with the alliance between the Philippines and the
United States and effectively implemented an essentially similar foreign policy to
that of the dictatorship. For example, Cory recognized that the large sum of
foreign debts incurred by the Marcos regime never benefitted the Filipino people.
Nevertheless, Cory expressed her intention 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 of 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.
Activities:
A. Essay
1. Give your own analysis of the following documents: (in not less than 500
words)
a. Proclamation of the Philippine Independence
b. Caricatures during the American Period