Introduction to

-H--i-s--t�ory:

Definition, Issues, Sources, and Methodology

Learning Objectives:
� To understand the meani!}g of history as an academic discipline and to be
familiar with the underlying philosophy and metho� dology of the discipline.
� To apply the knowledge in historical methodology and philosophy in assessing and
analyzing existing historical narratives.
� To examine and assess critically the value of historical evidences and sources.
� To appreciate the importance of history in the social and national life of the
Philippines.
This chapter introduces history as a discipline and as a narrative. It presents
the definition of the history, which transcends the common definition of history as
the study of the past. This chapter also discusses several issues in history that
consequently opens up for the theoretical aspects of the discipline. The
distinction between primary and secondary sources is also discussed in relation to
the historical subject matter being studied and the historical methodology employed
by the historian. Ultimately, this chapter also tackles the task of the historian
as the arbiter of facts and evidences in making his interpretatio;n and forming
historical narrative.

Definition and Subject Matter

History has always been known as the study of the pastS. tudents of general
education often dread the subject for its notoriety in requiring them to memorize
dates., places, names, and events from distant eras. This low appreciation of the
discipline may be rooted from the shallow understanding of history's relevance to
their lives and to their respective contexts. While the popular definition of
history as the study of the past is not wrong, it does not give justice to the
complexity of the subject and its importance to human civilization.
History was derived from the Greek word historia which means "knowledge
acquired through inquiry or investigation." History as a discipline existed for
around 2,400 years and is as old as mathematics and philosophy. This term was then
adapted to classical Latin where it acquired a new definition. Historia became
known as the account of the past of a person or of a group of people through
written documents and historical evidences. That meaning stuck until the early
parts of the twentieth .century. History became an important academic discipline.
It became the historian's duty to write about the lives of important individuals
like monarchs, heroes, saints, and nobilities. History was also focused on writing
about wars, revolutions, and other important breakthroughs. It is thus important
toask: What counts as history? Traditional historians lived with the mantra of "no
document,
no history." It means that unless a written doc�ment can prove a certain historical
event, then it cannot be considered as a historical fact.
But as any oth r academic disciplines, history progressed and opened up to the
possibility of valid historical sources, which were not limited to written
documents, like government records, chroniclers' accounts, or personal letters.
Giving premium to written documents essentially invalidates the history of other
civilizations that do not keep written records. Some were keener on passing their
history by word of mouth. Others got their historical documents burned or destroyed
in the events of war or colonization. Restricting historical evidence as
exclusively written is also discrimination against other social classes who were
not recorded in paper. Nobilities, monarchs, the elite, and even the middle class
would have their birth, education, marriage, and death as matters of government and
historical record. But what of peasant families or indigenous groups who

were not given much thought about being registered to government records? Does the
absence of written documents about them mean that they�were p opl of no history or
past? Did they even exist?
This loophole was recognized by historians who started using other kinds of
historical sources, which may not be in written form but were just as
valid. A few of these examples are oral traditions in forms of epics and songs, .
artifacts, architecture, and memory. History thus became more inclusive and started
collaborating with other disciplines as its au:xiliary disciplines. With the aid of
archaeologists, historians can use artifacts from a bygone era to study ancient
civilizations that were formerly ignored in history because of lack of q.ocuments.
Linguists can also be helpful in tracing historical evolutions, past connections
among different groups, and flow of cultural influence by studying language and the
changes that it hasungergone. Even scientists like biologists and biochemists can
help with the study of the past through analyzing genetic and DNA patterns of human
societies.

Questions and Issues in History �

Indeed, history as a discipline has already turned into a complex and dynamic
inquiry. This dynamism inevitably produced various perspectives on the discipline
regarding different questions like: What is history? Why study history? And history
for whom? These questions can be answered by historiography. In simple terms,
historiography is the history of hist ry. History and historiography should not be
confused with each other. The farmer's object of study is the past, the events that
happened in the past, and the causes of such events. The latter's object of study,
on the other hand, is history itself (i.e., How was a certain historical text
written? Who wrote it? What was the context of its publication? What particular
historical method was employed? What were the sources used?). Thus, historiography
lets the students.have a better understanding of history. They do not only get to
learn historical facts, but they are also provided with the understanding of the
facts' and the historian's contexts. The methods employed by the historian and the
theory and perspective, which guided him, will also be analyzed. Historiography is
important for someone who studies history because it teaches the student to be
critical in the lessons of history presented to him.
 . History has played -various roles in the past. States use history to unite a
nation. It can be used as a tool to legitimize regimes and forge a sense of

collective identity through collective memory. Lessons from th.e past can be used
to make sense of the present. Learning of past mistakes can help people to not
repeat them. Being reminded of a great past can inspire people to keep their good
practices to move forward.

As a narrative, any history that hasbeen taught and written is always intended
for a certain groupof audience.When the ilustrados, like Jose Rizal, Isabelo de
losReyes, and Pedro Paterno wrote history, theyintended it for the Spaniards so
that they would realize that Filipinos are people of their own intellect and
culture. When American historians depicted the Filipino people as uncivilized in
their publications, they intended that narrative for their fellow Americans to
justify their colonization of the islands. They wanted the colonization to appear
not as a means of undermining the Philippines' sov reignty, but as a, civilizing
mission to fulfill what they called as the "white man's burden." The same is true
for nations which prescribe official versions of their history like North Korea,
the Nazi Germany during the wa:r period, and Thailand. The same was attempted by
Marcos in the Philippines during the 1970s.

One of the problems confronted by history is the accu'Sation that the history
is always written by victors. This connotes that the narrative of the past is
always written from the bias of the powerful and the more dominant player. For
instance, the history of the Second World War in the Philippines always depicts the
United States as the hero and the Imperial Japanese Army as the oppressors.
Filipinos who collaborated with the Japanese were lumped in the category of
traitors orcollaborators. However, a more thorough historical investigation will
reveal a more nuanced account of the history of that period instead of a simplified
narrative as a story of hero versus villain.

History and the Historian

If storyiswritten with agenda or is heavily influenced bythe historian, is it

possible to come up with an absolute historical truth? Is history an objective
discipline? If it is not, is it still worthwhile to study history? These questions
have haunted historians for many generations. Indeed, an exact and accurate account
of the past is impossible for the very simple reason that we cannot go back to the
past. We cannot access the past directly as our subject matter. Historians only get
to access representation of the past through historical sources and evidences.
Therefore, it is the historian's job not just toseek historical evidences and
facts but also to interpret these facts. "Facts cannot speak for themselves." It is
the job of the historian to give meaning to these facts and organize them into a
timeline, establish causes, and write history. Meanwhile, the historian is not
a.blank paper who mechanically interprets and analyzes present historical fact. He
is a person of his own who is influenced by his own context, environment, ideology,
education, and influences, among others. In that sense, his interpretation of the
historical fact is affected by his context and circumstances. His subjectivity will
inevitably influence the process of his historical research: the methodology that
he will use, the facts that he shall select and �deem relevant, his interpretation,
and even the form of his writings. Thus, in one way or another, history is always
subjective. If that is so, can history still be considered as an academic and
scientific inquiry?
Historical research requires rigor. Despite the fact that histm�ians cannot
ascertain absolute objectivity, the study of history remains scientific because of
the rigor of research and methodology that historians employ. Historical
methodology comprises certain techniques and rules that

historians follow in order to properly utilize sources and historical evidences in

writing history Certain rules apply in cases of conflicting accounts in_
different sources, and on how to properly treat eyewitness accounts and oral
sources as valid historical evidence, In doing so, historical claims done by
historians and the arguments that they forward in th ir historical writings, while
may be influenced by the historian's inclinations, can still be validated by using
reliable evidences and employing correct and meticulous historical methodology.

For example, if a historian chooses to use an oral account as his data in

studying the ethnic history of the Ifugaos in the Cordilleras during the American
Occupation, he needs to validate the claims. of his informant through comparing and
corroborating it with written sources. Therefore, while bias is inevitable, the
historian can balance this out by reiying to evidences that back up his claim. In
thissense, the historian need not let his bias blind his judgment and such bias is
only acceptable if he maintains his rigor as a researcher.

Historical Sources

With the past as history's subject matter, the historian's most important
research tools are historical sources. In general, historical sources can be
classified between primary and secondary sources. The classification of
sources between these two categories depends on the historical subject being

studied. Primary sources are those sources produced at the same time as the event,
period, or subject being studied. For example, if a historian wishes to study the
Commonwealth Constitution Convention of 1935, his prim ry sources can include the
minutes of the convention, newspaper clippings, Philippine Commission reports of
the U.S. Commissioners, records of the convention, the draft of the Constitution,
and even photographs of the event. Eyewitness accounts of onvention delegates and
their memoirs can also be used as primary sources. The same goes with other
subjects of historical study. Archival documents., artifacts, memorabilia, letters,
census, and government records, among others are the most common examples of
primary sources.
On the other hand, secondary s'?urces are those sources, which were produced by
an author who used pri1nary sources to produce the material. In other words,
secondary sources are historical sQurces, which studied a certain historical
subject. For example, on he subject of the Philippine Revolution of 1896, students
can read Teodoro Agoncillo's Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the
Katipunan published originally in 1956. The Philippine Revolution happened in the
last years of the nineteenth century while Agoncillo published his work in 1956,
which makes the Revolt of the Masses a secondary source. More than this, in writing
the book, Agoncillo used primary sources with his research like documents of the
Katipunan, interview with the veterans of the Revolution, and correspondence
between and among Katipuneros.
However, a student should not be confused about what counts as a primary or a
secondary source. As mentioned above, the classifioation of sources between primary
and secondary-depends not on the period when the source was produced or the type of
the source but on the subject of the historical research. For example, a textbook
is.usually classified.as a secondary source, a tertiary source even. However, this
classiticationis usual but notautomatic. If a historian chooses to write the
history of education in the 1980s, he can utilize textbooks used in that period.as
a primary source. If a historian wishes to study the historiography of the
Filipino-American War for example, he can use works of different authors on the
topic s his primary source as well.
Both primary and secondary sources are useful in Writing and learni g history.
However, historians and students of history need to thoroughly
scrutinize these historical sources to avoid deception and to come up with the
historical truth. The historian should be able to conduct an external and internal
criticism of the source, especially primary sources which can age in centuries.
External criticism is the practice of verifying the authenticity of evidence by
exam�rin.g its physical characteristics; consistency with the historical
characteristic of the time when it was produced; and the materials used for the
evidence. Examples of the things that will be examined when conducting external
criticism of a document include the quality of the paper, the typeof the ink, and
the language an:d words used in the material, among others.
Intern.al criticism, on the other hand, is the examination of the
truthfulness of the eviden. ce. It loo s at the content of the source and examines
the circumstance of its production. Internal criticism looks at the
truthfulness and factuality of the evidence by looking at the author of the source,
its context, the agenda behind its creation, the knowledge which informed it, and
its intended purpose, among others. For example, Japanese reports and declarations
during the period of the war should not be taken as a historical fact hastily.
Internal criticism entails that the historian ack.nowledge and analyze how such
reports can be manipulated to be used as war propaganda. Validating historical
sources is important because the use of unverified, falsified, and untruthful
historical sources can lead to equally false conclusions. Without thorough
criticisms of historical evidences, historical deceptions and lies will be highly
probable.
One of the most scandalous cases of deception in Philippine history is the
hoa:& Code ofKalantiaw. Thecode was a set of rules contained in an epic, Maragtas,
which was allegedly written by a certain Datu Kalantiaw. The document was sold to
the National Library and was regarded as an important precolonial document until
1968, when American historian William Henry Scott debunked the authenticity of the
code due to anachronism and lack of evidence to prove that thecode existed in the
precolonial Philippine society. Ferdinand Marcos also claimed that hewasa decorated
World War II soldier who led a guerilla unit called Ang Maharlika. This was widely
believed by students of history and Marcos had war medals to show. This claim,
however, was disproven when historians counterchecked Marcos's claims with the war
records of the United States. These cases prove how deceptions can propagate
without rigorous historical research.

The task of the historian is to look at the available historical sources and
select the most relevant and meaningful for history and for the subject matter that
he is studying. History, like other academ:ic discipline, has come a long way but
still has a lot of remaining tasks to do. It does not claim to render absolute and
exact judgment because as long as questions are continuously asked, and aslongas
time unfolds, the studyof historycan never be complete. The task of the historian
is to organize the past that is being cre�ated so that it canoffer lessons for
nations, societies, and civilization. It is the historian's job to seek for the
meaning of recovering the past to let the people see the continuing relevance of
provenance, memory, remembering, and historical understanding for both the present
and the future.
Philippine historiography underwent everal changes since the precolonial pe1�iod
until the present. Ancient Filipinos narrated their history through communal songs
and epics that they passed orally from a generation to another. When the Spaniards
came, their chroniclers started recording their observations through written
accounts. The perspective of historical writing and inquiry also shifted. The
Spanish colonizers narrated the history of their colony in a bipartite view. They
saw the age before colonization as a dark period in the history of the islands,
until they brought light through Western thought and Christianity. Early
nationalists refuted this perspective and argued the tripartite view. They saw the
precolonial society as a luminous age that ended with darkness when the colonizers
captured tp.eir freedom. They believe.cl that the light would come again once the
colonizers were evicted from the Philippines. Filipino historiai:i Zeus Salazar
introduced the new guiding philosophy for writing and teaching history: pantayong
pananaw (for us-from us perspective). This perspective highlights the importance of
facilitating an internal conversation and discourse among Filipinos about our own
history, using the language that is understood by everyone.

A. True or False. Write true if the statement is true. Otherwise, write

false in the space prorided.
1. History is the study of the past.
2. Historical sources that were not written should not be used
in writing history.
3. The subject of historiogi�aphy is history itself.
4. History has.no use for the present, thus, the saying "past is
past" is true.
5. History is limited to the story of a hero versus a villain.
6. Only primary sources may be used in writing history.
7. There are three types of sources: primary, secondary, and
tertiary sources.
8. External criticism 1s done by exam1n1ng the physical
characteristics of a source.
9. Internal criticism is done by looking at a source's quality of
paper and type of ink, among others.
10. The historians are the only source of history.

B. What Source? Read the following scenarios and classify the sources discovered as
primary, secondary, or tertiary sources. Write your answer in the space provided.
1. Jose was exploring the library in his new school in Manila. He wanted to study
the history of Calamba, Laguna during the nineteenth century. In one of the books,
he saw an old photograph of a woman standing in front of an old church, clipped
among the pages. At the back of the photo was a fine inscription that says:
''Kalamba, 19 de Junia 1861."
Is the photograph a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source?

2. It was Lean's first dayin his first year of college in a big university. His
excitement made him come to class unusually early and he found their classroom
empty. He e?(plored the classroom nd sat at the teacher's table. He looked at the
table drawer and saw a book entitled U.G. An Underground Tale: The Journey of Edgar
Jopson and the First Quarter Storm Generation. He started reading the book and
realized that it was a biography of a student leader turned political activist
during the time of Ferdinand Marcos. The author used interviews with friends and
family of Jopson, and other primary documents related to his works and life.
Is the book a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source?

3. Lorena was a new teacher of Araling Panlipunan in a small elementary school in

Mauban Quezon. Her colleagues gave her the new textbook that sheought to use in
class. Before the classstarted, Lorena studied the textbook carefully. She noted
that the authors used works by other known historians in writing the textbook. She
saw that the bibliography included Teodoro Agoncillo's The Revolt of the Masses and
The Fateful Years: Japan's Adventure in th Philippines, 1941-45. She also saw that
the authors used Ma. Luisa Camagay's Working Women of Manila During the 19th
Century and .many others.
Is the textbook a primary, secondary, or a tertiary source?
4. Manuel visited the United States for a few months to see his relatives who have
lived there for decades. His uncle brought him on tours around Illinois. Manuel
visited the Field Museum of Natural History where a golden image,of 3: woman caught
his eye. Manuel looked closer and read that the image was called "The Golden Tara."
It originated from Agusan del Sur and was bought by the museum in 1922. It was
believed to be made prior to the arrival of the Spaniards in the Philippines.
Is the sculpture a primary, secondary, or tertiary source?

5- Gregoria lovedto travelaround the country. She liked bringing with her a travel
brochure that informs her of the different sites worth visiting in the area. Her
travel brochure was usually produced by the tourism department of the province. It
shows pictures of destinations visited by tourists and a few basic information
about the place like the origin of the name, the historical significance of the
place, and some other information acquired by the office's researchexs and writers.
Is the travel brochure a primary,.secondary, or a tertiary source?

C. My P1�imaI'Y Source. Using the examples of a primary source in this chapter,

bring a primary source that can be used in the writing of your life history.
Present this in class and discuss how it qualifies as a pnmai�y source.

References
Carr, E. (1991). What Is History. London, United Kingdom: Penguin Lemon, M. (1995).
The Discipline of History and the History of Thought. New
York, United States of America: Routledge.
rrosh, J. (2002). The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the
Study of Modern History (Revised 3rd Ed.). London, United Kingdom: Pearson
Education Ltd.
Content and Contextual Analysis of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine History

Learning Objectives:
� To familiarize oneself with the primary documents in diffe1�ent historical perio
s of the Philippines.
'
� To learn history through primary sources.
� To properly interpret primary sources through exarrnn1ng the content and context
of the document.
� To understand the context behind each selected document.
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 th period of the event or subject being
studied.

13

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
fal?ricated. 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 9ther 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 t.erms 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 Col'azon 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 l:,y

Magel/an by Antonio Pigafetta

This book was taken from the chronicles of contempor ry 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 arri al
inthePhilippines, his encounter with local leaders, his death in the handsof

Lapulapu'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 I).Ot 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 conJ;ext 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 t4e 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, ai:id 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
uninhabi ed island for greater security wher.e they could rest fora 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
Chapter 2IContent and Contextual Analysis of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine
History 15

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 Anger'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 hey 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 th n expressed their desire to become brothers.
Magellan also boasted of his men in armor who could not be struck with swords and
daggers. J'he king was fascinated and remarked that menin 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 rel?orted 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 hesaw 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 wasordered to plant it in the places that he would
reach. Magellan further explained that thecross 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 ca':lse them troubles, and any person who might
be held captives by then1 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 n1ove and look for
-islands where they could acquire more supplies and provisions. They learned of the
islands of Ceylc;:m (Leyte), Bohol, and Zzubu (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 yea1�, 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 hewasa
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 e1nperor of
a great empire and that it would do them better to make friends with the1n 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 de1nanded that Magellan do
the same. Pigafetta recounts:
"Then the king aid that hewascontent, 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. Oux
people answered that he would do it. Besides that, he said that all the captains
who came to his country had been accusto1ned to 1nake 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's 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 leaders 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 nd 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 theking and all his people answered that thy would obey the comm.ands of
the captain and doall that hetold 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 FerI)and (Fernando), after the brother of the emperor, and the
King of Mazavva, Jehan: tothe 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

and baptized him. After the baptismal, Pigafetta recorded that the manwas 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 hi1n 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 wer 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 no listened to. The islanders
seeing that the shots of our guns did them little or noharm 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 ha1�dly 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 mencharged at the
natives and tried tointimidate them by burningan entire village but this only
enraged the natives further. Magellan was specifically targeted because the natives
knew that hewasthecaptain general. Magellan was hit with a lance in the face.
Magellan retaliate andpierced 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 deteri9rated, 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 to give an
opportunity for the retreat of his men."

Pigafetta also said that the king of Cebu who was baptized could have sent help
but Magellan instructed him not to join the battle and stay in the balangay so that
he would see how they fought. The king offered the people of Mactan gifts of any
value and amount in exchange of Magellan's body but the chief refused. They wanted
to keep Magellan's body as a memento of 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's
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 a 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 of great
importance in the study and writingof Philippine history. Nevertheless, there needs
to have a more nuanced reading of the source within a contextual backdrop. Astudent
of history should recognize certain biases accompanying the author and his
identity, loyalties, and the circumstances that hewasin; andhow it affected the
text that he produced. In the case of Pigafetta, the reader needs to understand
that he was a chronicler commis�sioned 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 characterizationof 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
hewascoming 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 il�.teracy to the European artillery, merchandise, and other
goods, in the same way that Pigafetta repeatedly mentioned the abunda.nce 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 toonarrow 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 theycould acquire more
gold and wealth tobeon top of all the European nations. Theobsession with spices
might be odd for Filipinos because of its ordinariness in the Philippines, but

understanding the context would reveal that spices were scarce in Europe and hence
were. seen as prestige goods. In that era, Spain and Portugal coveted the control
of Spice Islands because it would have led to a certain increase in wealth,
influence, and power. These contexts should be used and understood in order to have
a more qualified reading of Pigafett&,'s account.

The KKK and the�Kartilya ng Katipunan"

The Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng mga Anal?. 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 Katipunon, it was only this
organization that envisioned
(1) a united Filipino nation that would revolt against the Spaniards for (2) the
total in-dependence 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 llocano 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
/locos (The King of Ilocos). The imagination of the nation was largely absent in
the aspirations of the local revolts bef.ore Katipunan. On the other hand, the
propaganda movements led by the ilustrados like Marcelo H. del Pilar, Graciano
Lopez '1aena, 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 Jacin.to 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 mak themember 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 1�easonable.
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, gfiin 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.
X. 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 in her and she will
remind thee of the mother who bore thee and reared thee.
XJI. What thou dost not desire done unto thy wife, childl'en, 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 nose is aquiline, and
his color white, not because he is a priest, a servant of God, no:r 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
fathel'land, though he be born in the wilderness and know no tongue but his own.
XIV. When these rules of conduct shall be k'uown to all, the longed� for sun of
Liberty shall rise brilliant over this most unhappy portion of the globe and its
rays shall diffuse everlasting joy among the cqnfederated 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 what will be his duties, he may fill out
the application for admission.
As the primary governing document, which determines the rules of conduct in
tp.e Katipunan, properly understanding the Kartily.a 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 cqntext. 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 1�ace, 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 saw to it that the
alternative order that they wished to promulgate through their 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 wervalues that first emerged in
the eighteenth century French Revolution, which spread throughout Europe and
reached the educated class o{ the colonies. Jacinto, an ilustrado himself, certai
ly 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 th importance of honor in words and in action. The teaching of the
Katipunan on how women should be treat d 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 menshould 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 noi 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, theKartilya 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 Kar,tilya 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 waythat you want yours to be treated is an instruction on how
Katipuneros should treat andregard 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 thedocument
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 wascreated 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 treat1nent 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 of a decision being rendered without a hearing
of the persons accused."

The above passage demonstrates the justificationsbehind the revolution against

Spain. Specifically cited are the abuse by the Civil Guards and the unlawful
shooting of prisone1�s 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 nar1�ates 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 gi�eedy
body of friars in their insatiable desire to seek revenge upon and exterminate all
those who are opposed to their Machiavellian purposes, which ti�amples upon the
penal code prescribed for these islands." The document also narrates the Cavite
Mutiny of January 1872 tha:t 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
� orde 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
Chapter 21Content and Contextual Analysis of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine
History 27

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 c-onfirm 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 theip. 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 wasfirst 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 colorsthe three
armsreferred 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 thisinsu1�rectionary
movement broke out; the sun represents the gigantic strides tha:t 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 soC?n
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."

Thisoften overlooked detail reveals muchabout 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 origj.nal
symbolic meaning of somethiq.g 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 ''Procl<fmation 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 thePhilippine 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 estat s in different
'
provinces like Batangas and Laguna dissolve, if and when the revolution
succeeded. Such aspects nd realities of the revolutionary struggle were either
unfamiliar to the middle class revolutionary leaders like Emilio Aguinaldo, J\
mbrosio Rianzares-Bautista, and Felipe Buencamino, or were intentionally left out
becau.se they were landholders themselves:

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
I
awakening of the Filipinos in the real conditions of the nation under Spain. Jose
Rizal's legacy and martyr.dom 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's Magdiwang in the
Katipunan is no secret in the pagesof 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
canbefound 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 surround.ing 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 Philip,?ine Political Caricature in Alfred McCoy's Philippine

Cartoons: Political Caricature of� theAmeri an Era (1900-1941)
 Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which v ered
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
cartoo -""'!l"'"---------- - --:,,yof e.'.ach one.
, -; 'ii;f"}/�: . "< ,....
..,;,.
> ,, it

-� �#..0; -"-""""-
. �. ,,� - ' 'I . .
I',.

.J;,

The first example �Shown above was published in The Independent on May 20,
1916. The cartoon hows a politician fr.om Tondo, n,amedDr. 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 16 J.une 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
th 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
thegreat 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. ThePhilippine 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 Lipang Kalabaw on.24 August 1907. In the
picture, we can see Uncle Sam rationing porridge to the politician 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 Ame-,.ican 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 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 betw en 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 voters was cancelled
out. The problem continues up to the p1�esent 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 arrd 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 c lled 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 polic;e 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 Filipin9s 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 in 1986.The EDSAPeople
Power, which installed Cory Aquino in the presidency, 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 "Ninoy'' 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 andfreedom had longbeen compromised throughout the Marcos
regime. This is despite the,faet 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. Lea ing
military officials of the regime and Martial Law orchestrators the selves, Juan
Ponce Enrile and Fidel V.
Ramos, plotted to take over the presidency, until civilians heeded the
�
call of then 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 from the -presidency aftei� 21 years.

On 18 September 1986, seven 1nonths since Cory became president, she went to
the United States and spoke before the joint session of the U.S. 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 21 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 e ecution 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 rimes. 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, murderand a hostof
other crinies before a military commission. Ninoy challenged its authority and went
on a fast. If he survived it, then hefelt 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 thegovernment
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 calledt even if I knew
it would be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of the opposition, that. I ran the
grave r.isk 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,
garneri g 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 ofthe 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:
"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
give�s 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 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 con�stitutional
government."

Cory t en 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 dem0cracy. She invoked the path of
peace because s�he believed that it was the moral path that a moral government must
take. Nevertheless, Cory took a ste11> back when she said that while peace is the
priority of her presidency, she ''will not waiver" when freedom and democracy are
threatened. S;he said that, similar to Abraham Lincoln, she unde:rstands that
"force may be nece.ssary 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 tothe 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 turntothat 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 Marcos1 no commensurate assistance wasyet 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 fnoney, 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 fu1ther 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 ques.tion to.the U.S. Congress:
"Has there�been a greater test of national co1nmitment to the ideals you hold dear
than that my people have gone through? You havespent many lives and much treasure
tobring 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 he "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 th 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 heresisted. 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 t e sharp contrast between her
government and of her predecessor by expressing her commitment to a democratic
constitution drafted by an in.dependent commission. She claimed that such
constitution 1.J.pholds 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 th blowp_-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 comtnunist 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 C?ry'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 continuj.ng the alliance between the Philippines and the
United States despite the known affinity between the said wo;rld 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 e ample, Cory recognized that the large sum of foreign debts
incurred by the Marcos regime never benefitted the Filipino people. Nevertheless,
Cory expressed her1ntention to pay off those debts. Unknown to many Filipinos was
the fact that there wasa 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.

A. True or Fals . Write true if the statement is true. Otherwise, write

false in the space provided.
1. Non-written 'documents are not useful as primary sources in conducting
historical research.
2. The assassination of NinoyAquino is an important historical event that fueled
people's anger and condemnation of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos.
3. Apolinario Mabini penned the "Kartilya ng Katipunan."
4. Magellan and his fleet received a warm welcome from all of ' the chieftains
and local leaders in the Philippine Islands.
5. The Americans radically altered the social structure in the Philippines after
they took over from Spain in terms of socioeconomic equality.
6. The "Proclamation of Philippine Independence" reflects the social and economic
discontent of the masses about land ownership and other agrarian issues.
7. The enmity between Aguinaldo and Bonifacio did not affect how the farmer's
revolutionary government credited Bonifacio to the beginnings of the Philippine
Revolution.
8. Corazon Aquino did not want to forge alliance with the United States because
the latter was a known important ally of Marcos.
9. The conservative attitude of the youth toward sexuality did not change since
the Spanish period until the l 930s.
10. The forces of Magellan were successful in defeating and conquering Lapulapu.

Chapter 21Content and Contextual Analysis of Selected Primary Sources in Philippine

History �43

B. Critical Essay. Identify a primary source in Philippine history from the

examples provided in this chapter. Write an essay discussing (1) the importance of
the text, (2) the background of the text's author, (3) the context of the document,
and (4) the text's contribution to understanding Philippine history.
C. Group Work. Form five groups among the r�embers of the class. Each class will
pick one of the following primary sources: (1) The Laguna Copper Plate Inscription;
(2) The poem, "Ang Pag-ibig sa Tinubuang Lupa" by Andres Bonifacio; (3) The
declaration of Martial Lawin 1972 by Ferdinand Marcos; (4) The speech of KALIBAPI
Acting Director Camilo Osias on 7 December 1943; and (5) The 1935 Constitution.
Brainstorm with your group mates on how you will respond to the following
questions:
1. What does the q.ocument/artifact say?
2. What was the provenance or source of the document/artifact?
3. Who authored it (if applicable)?
4. What was the context of the primary source's production?

References
Aquino, C. (1986). "Restoring Democracy by the Ways of Democracy." In http:/
lwww.coryaquino.ph/index.phplworkslarticlel353b89aa-f2dc� lldf-b3cf-001617d76479.
Retrieved 18 May 2017.
Bautista, A. (1898). "Declaration of the Philippine Independence." trans. Sulpicio
Guevarra in The Laws of the First Philippine Republic 1972. Manila: National
Historical Commission.
Jacinto, E. (1896). "Kartilya ng Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan." trans. Gregorio
Nieva, 1918. Text from Philippine Center for Masonic Studies, http://www.
philippinemasonry.org/kartilya-ng-katipunan.html. Retrieved 18 October 2017.
McCoy, A., & Roces, A. (1985). Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of
the American Era, 1900-1941. Quezon City: Vera-Reyes.
Pigafetta, A. (1874). The First Voyage Around the World by Magellan. trans.
Lord Stanley of Alderley. London: Hakluyt Society.