Unit 2

Content and Contextual Analysis of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine History

In the preceding chapter, we have discussed the importance of familiarizing oneself about the
different kinds of historical sources. The historian's primary tool of understanding and interpreting the past is
the historical sources. Historical sources ascertain historical facts. Such facts are then analyzed and
interpreted by the historian to weave historical narrative. Specifically, historians who study certain historical
subjects and events need to make use of various primary sources in order to weave the narrative. Primary
sources, as discussed in the preceding chapter, consist of documents, memoir, accounts, and other
materials that were produced at the period of the event or subject being studied.

Using primary sources in historical research entails two kinds of criticism. The first one is the
external criticism, and the second one is the internal criticism. External criticism examines the authenticity of
the document or the evidence being used. This is important in ensuring that the primary source is not
fabricated. On the other hand, internal criticism examines the truthfulness of the content of the evidence.
However, this criticism requires not just the act establishing truthfulness and/or accuracy but also the
examination of the primary sources in terms of the context of its production. For example, a historian would
have to situate the document in the period of its production, or in the background of its authors. In other
words, it should be recognized that facts are neither existing in a vacuum nor produced from a blank slate.
These are products of the time and of the people.

In this chapter, we are going to look at a number of primary sources from different historical periods
and evaluate these documents content in terms of historical value, and examine the context of their
production. The primary sources that we are going to examine are Antonio Pigafetta's First Voyage Around
the World, Emilio Jacinto's "Kartilya ng Katipunan," the 1898 Declaration of Philippine Independence,
Political Cartoon's Alfred McCoy's Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941),
and Corazon Aquino's speech before the U.S. Congress. These primary sources range from chronicles,
official documents, speeches, and cartoons to visual arts. Needless to say, different types of sources
necessitate different kinds of analysis and contain different levels of importance. We are going to explore that
in this chapter.

A Brief Summary of the First Voyage Around the World by Magellan by Antonio Pigafetta

This book was taken from the chronicles of contemporary voyagers and navigators of the sixteenth
century. One of them was Italian nobleman Antonio Pigafetta, who accompanied Ferdinand Magellan in his
fateful circumnavigation of the world. Pigafetta's work instantly became a classic that prominent literary men
in the West like William Shakespeare, Michel de Montaigne, and Giambattista Vico referred to the book in
their interpretation of the New World. Pigafetta's travelogue is one of the most important primary sources in
the study of the precolonial Philippines. His account was also a major referent to the events leading to
Magellan's arrival in the Philippines, his encounter with local leaders, his death in the hands of Lapu-Lapu’s
forces in the Battle of Mactan, and in the departure of what was left of Magellan's fleet from the islands.

Examining the document reveals several insights not just in the character of the Philippines during
the precolonial period, but also on how the fresh eyes of the Europeans regard a deeply unfamiliar terrain,
environment, people, and culture. Locating Pigafetta's account in the context of its writing warrants a
familiarity on the dominant frame of mind in the age of exploration, which pervaded Europe in the fifteenth
and sixteenth century. Students of history need to realize that primary sources used in the subsequent
written histories depart from certain perspectives. Thus, Pigafetta's account was also written from the
perspective of Pigafetta himself and was a product of the context of its production. The First Voyage Around
the World by Magellan was published after Pigafetta returned to Italy.

For this chapter, we will focus on the chronicles of Antonio Pigafetta as he wrote his firsthand
observation and general impression of the Far East including their experiences in the Visayas.

In Pigafetta's account, their fleet reached what he called the Ladrones Islands or the "Islands of the
Thieves." He recounted:
"These people have no arms, but use sticks, which have a fish bone at the end. They are poor, but
ingenious, and great thieves, and for the sake of that we called these three islands the Ladrones Islands."

The Ladrones Islands is presently known as the Marianas Islands. These islands are located south-
southeast of Japan, west-southwest of Hawaii, north of New Guinea, and east of Philippines. Ten days after
they reached Ladrones Islands, Pigafetta reported that they reached what Pigafetta called the isle of Zamal,
now Samar but Magellan decided to land in another uninhabited island for greater security where they could
rest for a few days. Pigafetta recounted that after two days, March 18, nine men came to them and showed
joy and eagerness in seeing them. Magellan realized that the men were reasonable and welcomed them with
food, drinks, and gifts. In turn, the natives gave them fish, palm wine (uraca), figs, and two cochos. The
natives also gave them rice (umai), cocos, and other food supplies. Pigafetta detailed in amazement and
fascination the palm tree which bore fruits called cocho, and wine. He also described what seemed like a
coconut. His description reads:

"This palm produces a fruit named cocho, which is as large as the head, or thereabouts: its first
husk is green, and two fingers in thickness, in it they find certain threads, with which they make the cords for
fastening their boats. Under this husk there is another very hard, and thicker than that of a walnut. They burn
this second rind, and make with it a powder which is useful to them. Under this rind there is a white marrow
of a finger's thickness, which they eat fresh with meat and fish, as we do bread, and it has the taste of an
almond, and if anyone dried it he might make bread of it (p. 72)."

Pigafetta characterized the people as "very familiar and friendly" and willingly showed them
different islands and the names of these islands The fleet went to Humunu Island (Homonhon) and there
they found what Pigafetta referred to as the "Watering Place of Good Signs." It is in this place where
Pigafetta wrote that they found the first signs of gold in the island. They named the island with the nearby
islands as the archipelago of St. Lazarus. They left the island, then on March 25th, Pigafetta recounted that
they saw two ballanghai (balangay), a long boat full of people in Mazzava/Mazaua. The leader, who Pigafetta
referred to as the king of the ballanghai (balangay), sent his men to the ship of Magellan. The Europeans
entertained these men and gave them gifts. When the king of the balangay offered to give Magellan a bar of
gold and a chest of ginger, Magellan declined. Magellan sent the interpreter to the king and asked for money
for the needs of his ships and expressed that he came into the islands as a friend and not as an enemy. The
king responded by giving Magellan the needed provisions of food in chinaware. Magellan exchanged gifts of
robes in Turkish fashion, red cap, and gave the people knives and mirrors. The two then expressed their
desire to become brothers. Magellan also boasted of his men in armor who could not be struck with swords
and daggers. The king was fascinated and remarked that men in such armor could be worth one hundred of
his men. Magellan further showed the king his other weapons, helmets, and artilleries. Magellan also shared
with the king his charts and maps and shared how they found the islands.

After a few days, Magellan was introduced to the king's brother who was also a king of another
island. They went to this island and Pigafetta reported that they saw mines of gold. The gold was abundant
that parts of the ship and of the house of the second king were made of gold. Pigafetta described this king as
the most handsome of all the men that he saw in this place. He was also adorned with silk and gold
accessories like a golden dagger, which he carried with him in a wooden polished sheath. This king was
named Raia Calambu, king of Zuluan and Calagan (Butuan and Caragua), and the first king was Raia Siagu.
On March 31st, which happened to be Easter Sunday, Magellan ordered the chaplain to preside a Mass by
the shore. The king heard of this plan and sent two dead pigs and attended the Mass with the other king.
Pigafetta reported that both kings participated in the mass. He wrote:

"...when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings, went to kiss the cross like us, but they
offered nothing, and at the elevation of the body of our Lord they were kneeling like us, and adored our Lord
with joined hands."

After the Mass, Magellan ordered that the cross be brought with nails and crown in place. Magellan
explained that the cross, the nail, and the crown were the signs of his emperor and that he was ordered to
plant it in the places that he would reach. Magellan further explained that the cross would be beneficial for
their people because once other Spaniards saw this cross, then they would know that they had been in this
land and would not cause them troubles, and any person who might be held captives by them would be
released. The king concurred and allowed for the cross to be planted. This Mass would go down in history as
the first Mass in the Philippines, and the cross would be the famed Magellan's Cross still preserved at
present day.

After seven days, Magellan and his men decided to move and look for islands where they could
acquire more supplies and provisions. They learned of the islands of Ceylon (Leyte), Bohol, and Zubu (Cebu)
and intended to go there. Raia Calambu offered to pilot them in going to Cebu, the largest and the richest of
the islands. By April 7th of the same year, Magellan and his men reached the port of Cebu. The king of
Cebu, through Magellan's interpreter, demanded that they pay tribute as it was customary, but Magellan
refused. Magellan said that he was a captain of a king himself and thus would not pay tribute to other kings.
Magellan's interpreter explained to the king of Cebu that Magellan's king was the emperor of a great empire
and that it would do them better to make friends with them than to forge enmity. The king of Cebu consulted
his council. By the next day, Magellan's men and the king of Cebu, together with other principal men of
Cebu, met in an open space. There, the king offered a bit of his blood and demanded that Magellan do the
same. Pigafetta recounts:

"Then the king said that he was content, and as a greater sign of affection he sent him a little of his
blood from his right arm, and wished he should do the like. Our people answered that he would do it. Besides
that, he said that all the captains who came to his country had been accustomed to make a present to him,
and he to them, and therefore they should ask their captain if he would observe the custom. Our people
answered that he would; but as the king wished to keep up the custom, let him begin and make a present,
and then the captain would do his duty."

The following day, Magellan spoke before the people of Cebu about peace and God. Pigafetta
reported that the people took pleasure in Magellan'. speech. Magellan then asked the people who would
succeed the king after his reign and the people responded that the eldest child of the king, who happened to
be a daughter, would be the next in line. Pigafetta also related how the people talked about, how at old age,
parents were no longer taken into account and had to follow the orders of their children as the new leader of
the land. Magellan responded to this by saying that his faith entailed children to render honor and obedience
to their parents. Magellan preached about their faith further and people were reportedly convinced. Pigafetta
wrote that their men were overjoyed seeing that the people wished to become Christians through their free
will and not because they were forced or intimidated.

On the 14th of April, the people gathered with the king and other principal men of the islands.
Magellan spoke to the king and encouraged him to be a good Christian by burning all of the idols and
worship the cross instead. The king of Cebu was then baptized as a Christian. Pigafetta wrote:

"To that the king and all his people answered that thy would obey the commands of the captain and
do all that he told them. The captain took the king by the hand, and they walked about on the scaffolding,
and when he was baptized he said that he would name him Don Charles (Carlos), as the emperor his
sovereign was named; and he named the prince Don Fernand (Fernando), after the brother of the emperor,
and the King of Mazavva, Jehan: to the Moor he gave the name of Christopher, and to the others each a
name of his fancy."

After eight days, Pigafetta counted that all of the island's inhabitant were already baptized. He
admitted that they burned a village down for obeying neither the king nor Magellan. The Mass was
conducted by the shore every day. When the queen came to the Mass one day, Magellan gave her an image
of the Infant Jesus made by Pigafetta himself. The king of Cebu swore that he would always be faithful to
Magellan. When Magellan reiterated that all of the newly baptized Christians need to burn their idols, but the
natives gave excuses telling Magellan that they needed the idols to heal a sick man who was a relative to the
king. Magellan insisted that they should instead put their faith in Jesus Christ. They went to the sick man nd
baptized him. After the baptismal. Pigafetta recorded that the man was able to speak again. He called this a
miracle.

On the 26th of April, Zula, a principal man from the island of Matan (Mactan) went to see Magellan
and asked him for a boat full of men so that he would be able to fight the chief named Silapulapu (Lapulapu).
Such chief, according to Zula, refused to obey the king and was also preventing him from doing so. Magellan
offered three boats instead and expressed his desire to go to Mactan himself to fight the said chief.
Magellan's forces arrived in Mactan in daylight. They numbered 49 in total and the islanders of Mactan were
estimated to number 1,500. The battle began. Pigafetta recounted:

"When we reached land, we found the islanders fifteen hundred in number, drawn up in three
squadrons; they came down upon us with terrible shouts, two squadrons attacking us on the flanks, and the
third in front. The captain then divided his men in two bands. Our musketeers and crossbow-men fired for
half an hour from a distance, but did nothing, since the bullets and arrows, though they passed through their
shields made of thin wood, and perhaps wounded their arms, yet did not stop them. The captain shouted not
to fire, but he was not listened to. The islanders seeing that the shots of our guns did them little or no harm
would not retire, but shouted more loudly, and springing from one side to the other to avoid our shots, they at
the same time drew nearer to us, throwing arrows, javelins, spears hardened in fire, stones, and even mud,
so that we could hardly defend ourselves. Some of them cast lances pointed with iron at the captain-
general."
 Magellan died in that battle. The natives, perceiving that the bodies of the enemies were protected
with armors, aimed for their legs instead. Magellan was pierced with a poisoned arrow in his right leg. A few
of their men charged at the natives and tried to intimidate them by burning an entire village but this only
enraged the natives further. Magellan was specifically targeted because the natives knew that he was the
captain general. Magellan was hit with a lance in the face. Magellan retaliated and pierced the same native
with his lance in the breast and tried to draw his sword but could not lift it because of his wounded arm.
Seeing that the captain has already deteriorated, more natives came to attack him. One native with a great
sword delivered a blow in Magellan's left leg, brought him face down and the natives ceaselessly attacked
Magellan with lances, swords, and even with their bare hands. Pigafetta recounted the last moments of
Magellan:

“Whilst the Indians were thus overpowering him, several times he turned round towards us to see if
we were all in safety, as though his obstinate fight had no other object than safety as thou give an
opportunity for the retreat of his men."

Pigafetta also said that the king of Cebu not to join the battle and stay in sent help but Magellan
instructed him not to join. The king offered the p balangay so that he would see how they fought. The in
exchange of Magellan's body of Mactan gifts of any value and amount in exchange of Magellan's body as a
memento of the chief refused. They wanted to keep Magellan s bod their victory.

Magellan's men elected Duarte Barbosa as the new captain. Pigafetta also told how Magellan's
slave and interpreter named Henry betrayed them and told the king of Cebu that they intended to leave as
quickly as possible Pigafetta alleged that the slave told the king that if he followed the slave. advice, then the
king could acquire the ships and the goods of Magellan's fleet. The two conspired and betrayed what was left
of Magellan's men. The king invited these men to a gathering where he said he would present the jewels that
he would send for the King of Spain. Pigafetta was not able to join the twenty-four men who attended
because he was nursing his battle wounds. It was only a short time when they heard cries and lamentations.
The natives had slain all of the men except the interpreter and Juan Serrano who was already wounded.
Serrano was presented and shouted at the men in the ship asking them to pay ransom so he would be
spared. However, they refused and would not allow anyone to go to the shore. The fleet departed and
abandoned Serrano. They left Cebu and continued their journey around the world.

Analysis of Pigafetta's Chronicle

The chronicle of Pigafetta was one of the most cited documents by historians who wished to study
the precolonial Philippines. As one of the earliest written accounts, Pigafetta was seen as a credible source
for å period, which was prior unchronicled and undocumented. Moreover, being the earliest detailed
documentation, it was believed that Pigafetta's writings account for the "purest" precolonial society. Indeed,
Pigafetta's work is a great importance in the study and writing of Philippine history. Nevertheless, there
needs to have a more nuanced reading of the source within a contextual backdrop. A student of history
should recognize certain biases accompany the author and his identity, loyalties, and the circumstances that
he was and how it affected the text that he produced. In the case of Pigafetta, reader needs to understand
that he was a chronicler commissioned by the King of Spain to accompany and document a voyage intended
to expand the Spanish empire. He was also of noble descent who came from a rich family in Italy. These
attributes influenced his narrative, his selection of details to be included in the text, his characterization of the
people and of the species that he encountered, and his interpretation and retelling of the events. Being a
scholar of cartography and geography, Pigafetta was able to give details on geography and climate of the
places that their voyage had reached.

In reading Pigafetta's description of the people, one has to keep in mind that he was coming from a
sixteenth century European perspective. Hence, the reader might notice how Pigafetta, whether implicitly or
explicitly, regarded the indigenous belief systems and way of life as inferior to that of Christianity and of the
Europeans. He would always remark on the nakedness of the natives or how he was fascinated by their
exotic culture. Pigafetta also noticeably emphasized the natives' amazement and illiteracy to the European
artillery, merchandise, and other goods, in the same way that Pigafetta repeatedly mentioned the abundance
of spices like ginger, and of precious metals like gold. His observations and assessments of the indigenous
cultures employed the European standards. Hence, when they saw the indigenous attires of the natives,
Pigafetta saw them as being naked because from the European standpoint, they were wearing fewer clothes
indeed. Pigafetta's perspective was too narrow to realize that such attire was only appropriate to the tropical
climate of the islands. The same was true for materials that the natives used for their houses like palm and
bamboo. These materials would let more air come through the house and compensate for the hot climate in
the islands.
 It should be understood that such observations were rooted from the context of Pigafetta and of his
era. Europe, for example, was dominated by the Holy Roman Empire, whose loyalty and purpose was the
domination of the Catholic Church all over the world. Hence, other belief systems different from that of
Christianity were perceived to be blasphemous and barbaric, even demonic. Aside from this, the sixteenth
century European economy was mercantilist. Such system measures the wealth of kingdoms based on their
accumulation of bullions or precious metals like gold and silver. It was not surprising therefore that Pigafetta
would always mention the abundance of gold in the islands as shown in his description of leaders wearing
gold rings and golden daggers, and of the rich gold mines. An empire like that of the Spain would indeed
search for new lands where they could acquire more gold and wealth to be on top of all the European
nations. The obsession with spices might be odd for Filipinos because of its ordinariness in the Philippines,
but King of Spain to accompany and document a voyage intended to expand the Spanish empire. He was
also of noble descent who came from a rich family in Italy. These attributes influenced his narrative, his
selection of details to be included in the text, his characterization of the people and of the species that he
encountered, and his interpretation and retelling of the events. Being a scholar of cartography and
geography, Pigafetta was able to give details on geography and climate of the places that their voyage had
reached.

The KKK and the "Kartilya ng Katipunan

The Kataastaasan, KagalanggalangangKatipunan ng mgaAnak ng Bayan (KKK) or Katipunan is

arguably the most important organization formed in the Philippine history. While anti-colonial movements,
efforts.and organizations had already been established centuries prior to the foundation of the Katipunan, it
was only this organization that envisioned (1) a united Filipino nation that would revolt against the Spaniards
for (2) the total independence of the country from Spain. Previous armed revolts had already occurred before
the foundation of the Katipunan, but none of them envisioned a unified Filipino nation revolting against the
colonizers. For example, Diego Silang was known as an Ilocano who took up his arms and led one of the
longest running revolts in the country. Silang, however, was mainly concerned about his locality and referred
to himself as El Rey de Ilocos (The King of Ilocos). The imagination of the nation was largely absent in the
aspirations of the local revolts before Katipunan. On the other hand, the propaganda movements led by the
ilustrados like Marcelo H. del Pilar, Graciano López Jaena, and Jose Rizal did not envision a total separation
of the Philippines from Spain, but only demanded equal rights, representation, and protection from the
abuses of the friars.

In the conduct of their struggle, Katipunan created a complex structure and a defined value system
that would guide the organization as a collective aspiring for a single goal. One of the most important
Katipunan documents was the Kartilya ng Katipunan. The original title of the document was "Manga (sic) Aral
Nang (sic) Katipunan ng mga A.N.B." or "Lessons of the Organization of the Sons of Country." The
document was written by Emilio Jacinto in the 1896. Jacinto was only 18 years old when he joined the
movement. He was a law student at the Universidad de Santo Tomas. Despite his youth, Bonifacio
recognized the value and intellect of Jacinto that upon seeing that Jacinto's Kartilya was much better than
the Decalogue he wrote, he willingly favored that the Kartilya be distributed to their fellow Katipuneros.
Jacinto became the secretary of the organization and took charge of the short-lived printing press of the
Katipunan. On 15 April 1897, Bonifacio appointed Jacinto as a commander of the Katipunan in Northern
Luzon. Jacinto was 22 years old. He died of Malaria at a young age of 24 in the town of Magdalena, Laguna.

The Kartilya can be treated as the Katipunan's code of conduct. It contains fourteen rules that
instruct the way a Katipunero should behave, and which specific values should he uphold. Generally, the
rules stated in the Kartilya can be classified into two. The first group contains the rules that will make the
member an upright individual and the second group contains the rules that will guide the way he treats his
fellow men.

Below is the translated version of the rules in Kartilya:

I. The life that is not consecrated to a lofty and reasonable purpose is a tree without a shade, if not
a poisonous weed.
II. To do good for personal gain and not for its own sake is not virtue.
III. It is rational to be charitable and love one's fellow creature, and to adjust one's conduct, acts
and words to what is in itself reasonable.
IV. Whether our skin be black or white, we are all born equal:
superiority in knowledge, wealth and beauty are to be understood, but not superiority by nature.
V. The honorable man prefers honor to personal gain; the
scoundrel, gain to honor.
 VI. To the honorable man, his word is sacred.
VII. Do not waste thy time: wealth can be recovered but not time Lost.
VIII. Defend the oppressed and fight the oppressor before the law or in the field.
IX. The prudent man is sparing in words and faithful in keeping
secrets. On the thorny path of life, man is the guide of woman and the children, and if the guide
leads to the precipice, those whom he guides will also go there.
XI. Thou must not look upon woman as a mere plaything, but as a faithful companion who will
share with thee the penalties of life; her (physical) weakness will increase thy interest her and she
will remind thee of the mother who bore thee
children,
XII.What thou dost not desire done unto thy wife, children brothers and sisters, that do not unto the
wife, children, brothers and sisters of thy neighbor.
XIII.Man is not worth more because he is a king, because his nos is aquiline, and his color white,
not because he is a priest a servant of God, nor because of the high prerogative that he enjoys
upon earth, but he is worth most who is a man of proven and real value, who does good, keeps his
words, is worthy and honest; he who does not oppress nor consent to being oppressed, he who
loves and cherishes his fatherland. though he be born in the wilderness and know no tongue but his
own.
XIV. When these rules of conduct shall be known to all, the longed for sun of Liberty shall rise
brilliant over this unhappiest portion of the globe and its rays shall diffuse everlasting joy among the
confederated brethren of the same rays, the lives of those who have gone before, the fatigues and
the well-paid sufferings will remain. If he who desires to enter has informed himself of all this and
believes he will be able to perform whatwill be his duties, he may fill out the application for
admission.

As the primary governing document, which determines the rules of conduct in the Katipunan,
properly understanding the Kartilya will thus help in understanding the values, ideals, aspirations, and even
the ideology of the organization.

Analysis of the "Kartilya ng Katipunan"

Similar to what we have done to the accounts of Pigafetta, this primary source also needs to be
analyzed in terms of content and context. As a document written for a fraternity whose main purpose is to
overthrow a colonial regime, we can explain the content and provisions of the Kartilya as a reaction and
response to certain value systems that they found despicable in the present state of things that they
struggled against with. For example, the fourth and the thirteenth rules in the Kartilya are an invocation of the
inherent equality between and among men regardless of race, occupation, or status. In the context of the
Spanish colonial era where the indios were treated as the inferior of the white Europeans, the Katipunan that
the alternative order that they wished to promulgate the revolution necessarily destroyed this kind of unjust
hierarchy.

Moreover, one can analyze the values upheld in the document as consistent with the burgeoning
rational and liberal ideals in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. Equality, tolerance, freedom, and liberty
were values that first emerged in the eighteenth century French Revolution, which spread throughout Europe
and reached the educated class of the colonies. Jacinto, an ilustrado himself, certainly got an understanding
of these values. Aside from the liberal values that can be dissected in the document, we can also decipher
certain Victorian and chivalrous values in the text. For example, various provisions in the Kartilya repeatedly
emphasized the importance of honor in words and in action. The teaching of the Katipunan on how women
should be treated with honor and respect, while positive in many respects and certainly a significant stride
from the practice of raping and physically abusing women, can still be telling of the Katipunan's secondary
regard for women in relation to men. For example, in the tenth rule, the document specifically stated that
men should be the guide of women and children, and that he should set a good example, otherwise the
women and the children would be guided in the path of evil. Nevertheless, the same document stated that
women should be treated as companions by men and not as playthings that can be exploited for their
pleasure.

In the contemporary eyes, the Katipunan can be criticized because of these provisions.
However, one must not forget the context where the organization was born. Not even in Europe or in
the whole of the West at that juncture recognized the problem of gender inequality. Indeed, it can be
argued that Katipunan's recognition of women as important partners in the struggle, as reflected not
just in Kartilya but also in the organizational structure of the fraternity where a women's unit was
established, is an endeavor advanced for its time. Aside from Rizal's known Letter to the Women of
Malolos, no same effort by the supposed cosmopolitan Propaganda Movement was achieved until
the movement's eventual disintegration in the latter part of the 1890s.

Aside from this, the Kartilya was instructive not just of the Katipunan's conduct toward other people,
but also for the members' development as individuals in their own rights. Generally speaking, the rules in the
Kartilya can be classified as either directed to how one should treat his neighbor or to how one should
develop and conduct one's self. Both are essential to the success and fulfillment of the Katipunan's ideals.
For example, the Kartilya's teachings on honoring one's word and not wasting time are teachings directed
toward self-development, while the rules on treating the neighbor's wife, children, and brothers the way that
you want yours to be treated is an instruction on how Katipuneros should treat and regard their neighbors.

All in all, proper reading of the Kartilya will reveal a more thorough understanding of the Katipunan
and the significant role that it played in the revolution and in the unfolding of the Philippine history, as we
know it.

Reading the "Proclamation of the Philippine Independence

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 out by a method of procedure more execrable than that of the Inquisition and which every civilized
nation rejects on account of 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 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."

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 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 forthe interested protection she
is extending to us and will continue to extend to us."

This often overlooked detail reveals much about the historically accurate in 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.

Analysis of the “Proclamation of the Philippine Independence"

As mentioned earlier, a re-examination of the document on the declaration of independence can

reveal some often overlooked historical truths about this important event in Philippine history. Aside from
this, the document reflects the general revolutionary sentiment of that period, for example, the abuses
specifically mentioned in the proclamation like friar abuse, racial discrimination, and inequality before the law
reflect the most compelling sentiments represented by the revolutionary leadership. However, no mention
was made about the more serious problem that affected the masses more profoundly (i.e., the land and
agrarian crisis felt by the numerous Filipino peasants in the nineteenth century). This is ironic especially
when renowned Philippine Revolution historian. Teodoro Agoncillo, stated that the Philippine Revolution was
an agrarian revolution. The common revolutionary soldiers fought in the revolution for the hope of owning the
lands that they were tilling once the friar estates in different provinces like Batangas and Laguna dissolve, if
and when the revolution succeeded. Such aspects and realities of the revolutionary struggle were either
unfamiliar to the middle class revolutionary leaders like Emilio Aguinaldo. AmbrosioRianzares-Bautista, and
Felipe Buencamino, or were intentionally left out because they were landholders themselves.
 The Treaty of Paris was an agreement signed between Spain and 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 proclamation also gives us the impression on how the victorious revolutionary government of
Aguinaldo historicized the struggle for independence. There were mentions of past events that were seen as
important turning points of the movement against Spain. The execution of the GOMBURZA, for example, and
the failed Cavite Mutiny of 1872 was narrated in detail. This shows that they saw this event as a significant
awakening of the Filipinos in the real conditions of the nation under Spain. Jose Rizal's legacy and
martyrdom was also mentioned in the document. However, the Katipunan as the pioneer of the revolutionary
movement was only mentioned once toward the end of the document. There was no mention of the
Katipunan's foundation. Bonifacio and his co-founders were also left out. It can be argued, thus, that the way
of historical narration found in the document also reflects the politics of the victors. The enmity between
Aguinaldo's Magdalo and Bonifacio'sMagdiwang in the Katipunan is no secret in the pages of our history. On
the contrary, the war led by Aguinaldo's men with the forces of the United States were discussed in detail.
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.

A Glance at Selected Philippine Political Caricature in Alfred McCoy's Philippine Cartoons: Political
Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941)

Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered away from the 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.

In his book Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941), 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. MANILA, MAY 10. 1916.

The first example shown above 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 (as 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 solo and was aimed as June 1917.
This was drawn by Fernando Amorsolo 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 wears a salakot, labeled Juan de la Cruz was grabbing the officer,
telling him leave the small-time pickpockets and thieves and to turn at the great thieve instead. He was
pointing to huge warehouses containing bulks of rice, mill and grocery products.

War against the Speculators

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.

This fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up police officer was at the screen saying that
couples are not allowed to neck and 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 Lipangkalabaw 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.

Analysis of the Political Caricatures during the American Period

The transition from the Spanish Colonial period to the American Occupation period demonstrated
different strands of changes and shifts in culture, society, and politics. The Americans drastically introduced
democracy to the nascent nation and the consequences were far from ideal. Aside from this, it was also
during the American period that Filipinos were introduced to different manifestations of modernity like
healthcare, modern transportation, and media. This ushered in a more open and freer press. The post-
independence and the post-Filipino-American period in the Philippines were experienced differently by
Filipinos coming from different classes. The upper principalia class experienced economic prosperity with the
opening up of the Philippine economy to the United States but the majority of the poor Filipino remained
poor, desperate, and victims of state repression.

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 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, 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 voters was cancelled out. The problem continues up to the present where politicians
transfer from one party to another depending on which party was powerful in specific periods of time.

The transition from a Catholic-centered, Spanish-Filipino society to an imperial American-

assimilated one, and its complications, were also depicted in the cartoons. One example is the
unprecedented increase of motorized vehicles in the city. Automobiles became a popular mode of
transportation in the city and led to the emergence of taxis. However, the laws and policy implementation
was mediocre. This resulted in the increasing colorum and unlicensed vehicles transporting people around
the city. The rules governing the issuance of driver's license was loose and traffic police could not be
bothered by rampant violations of traffic rules. This is a direct consequence of the drastic urbanization of the
Philippine society. Another example is what McCoy called the "sexual revolution" that occurred in the 1930s.
Young people, as early as that period, disturbed the conservative Filipino mindset by engaging in daring
sexual activities in public spaces like cinemas. Here, we can see how that period was the meeting point
between the conservative past and the liberated future of the Philippines.

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.

Revisiting Corazon Aquino's Speech Before the U.S. Congress

Corazon "Cory" Cojuangco Aquino functioned as the symbol of the restoration of democracy and
the overthrow of the Marcos Dictatorship 1986. The EDSA People Power, which installed Cory Aquino in the
president put the Philippines in the international spotlight for overthrowing a dictator through peaceful means.
Cory was easily a figure of the said revolution, as the widow of the slain Marcos oppositionist and former
Senator Benigno "Ninov Aquino Jr. Cory was hoisted as the antithesis of the dictator. Her image as a
mourning, widowed housewife who had always been in the shadow of her husband and relatives and had no
experience in politics was juxtaposed against Marcos's statesmanship, eloquence, charisma, and cunning
political skills. Nevertheless, Cory was able to capture the imagination of the people whose rights and
freedom had long been compromised throughout the Marcos regime. This is despite the fact that Cory came
from a rich haciendero family in Tarlac and owned vast estates of sugar plantation and whose relatives
occupy local and national government positions.

The People Power Revolution of 1986 was widely recognized around the world for its peaceful
character. When former senator Ninoy Aquino was shot at the tarmac of the Manila International Airport on
21 August 1983, the Marcos regime greatly suffered a crisis of legitimacy. Protests from different sectors
frequented different areas in the country. Marcos's credibility in the international community also suffered.
Paired with the looming economic crisis, Marcos had to do something to prove to his allies in the United
States that he remained to be the democratically anointed leader of the country. He called for a Snap
Election in February 1986, where Corazon Cojuangco Aquino, the widow of the slain senator was convinced
to run against Marcos. The canvassing was rigged to Marcos's favor but the people expressed their protests
against the corrupt and authoritarian government. Leading military officials of the regime and Martial Law
orchestrators themselves, Juan Ponce Enrile and Fidel V. Ramos, plotted to take over the presidency, until
civilians heeded the call of the Manila Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin and other civilian leaders gathered in
EDSA. The overwhelming presence of civilians in EDSA successfully turned a coup into a civilian
demonstration. The thousands of people who gathered overthrew Ferdinand Marcos fromthe presidency
after 21 years.

On 18 September 1986, seven months since Cory became president, she went to the United States
and spoke before the joint session of Congress. Cory was welcomed with long applause as she took the
podium and addressed the United States about her presidency and the challenges faced by the new
republic. She began her speech with the story of her leaving the United States three years prior as a newly
widowed wife of Ninoy Aquino. 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 for another fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back from his
determination to see his fast through to the end. He stopped only when it dawned on him that the
government would keep his body alive after the fast had destroyed his brain. And so, with barely any life in
his body, he called off the fast on the 40th day."
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."

Cory attributed the peaceful EDSA Revolution to the martyrdom of Ninoy. She stated that the death
of Ninoy sparked the revolution and the responsibility of "offering the democratic alternative" had "fallen on
(her) shoulders." Cory's address introduced us to her democratic philosophy, which she claimed she also
acquired from Ninoy. She argued:

"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 be the restoration of a fully constitutional government whose constitution utmost respect to the Bill of
Rights. She reported to the U.S. Congress

"Again as we restore 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 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 elections for both national and local positions. So,
within about a year from a peaceful but national upheaval that overturned a dictatorship. we shall have
returned to full constitutional government."

Cory then proceeded on her peace agenda with the existing communist insurgency, aggravated by
the dictatorial and authoritarian measure of Ferdinand Marcos. She asserted:

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

Cory's peace agenda involves political initiatives and re-integration program to persuade insurgents
to leave the countryside and return to the mainstream society to participate in the restoration of democracy.
She invoked the path of peace because she believed that it was the moral path that a moral government
must take. Nevertheless, Cory took a step back when she said that while peace is the priority of her
presidency, she will not waiver" when freedom and democracy are threatened. She said that, similar to
Abraham Lincoln, she understands that "force may be necessary before mercy" and while she did not relish
the idea, she will do whatever it takes to defend the integrity and freedom of (her) country."

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 deprived 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 people fulfilled the "most difficult condition of the
debt negotiation," which was the "restoration of democracy and responsible government."

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:

"Wherever I went in the campaign, slum area or impoverished village. They came to me with one
cry, democracy. Not food although they clearly needed it but democracy. Not work, although they surely
wanted it but democracy. Not money, for they gave what little they had to my campaign. They didn't expect
me to work a miracle that would instantly put food into their mouths, clothes on their back, education in their
children and give them work that will put dignity in their lives. But I feel the pressing obligation to respond
quickly as the leader of the people so deserving of all these things."

Cory proceeded in enumerating the challenges of the Filipino people as they tried building the new
democracy. These were the persisting communist insurgency and the economic deterioration. Cory further
lamented that these problems worsened by the crippling debt because half of the country's export earnings
amounting to $2 billion would go to pay just the interest on a debt whose benefit the Filipino people never
received." Cory then asked a rather compelling question to the U.S. Congress: "Has there been a greater
test of national commitment to the ideals you hold dear than that my people have gone tr You have spent
many lives and much treasure to bring tree 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."

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 at 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 attribution 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 dominant 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 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 than two decades of a polarizing as the reconciliatory agent after more than two-decade
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 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.