Module 2

Chapter 2: Content and contextual analysis of selected primary sources in

Philippine history
Learning objectives

 To familiarize oneself with the primary documents in different historical periods of the
Philippines

 To learn history through primary sources

 To properly interpret primary sources through examining the content and context of the
documents

 To understand the context behind each selected documents

In the preceding chapter, we have discussed the importance of familiarizing oneself about
the different kinds of historical sources. The historians 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 facts. Such facts are then analyzed and
interpreted by the historian to weave historical narrative. Specifically, historians who study
certain historical subjects and events need to make use of various primary sources in order to
weave the narrative. primary sources, as discussed in the preceding chapter, consist of
documents, memoir, accounts, and other materials that were produced at the period of the
event or subject being studied. Using primary sources in historical research entails two kinds of
criticisms. The first one is the external criticism, and the second one is the internal criticism.
External criticism examines the authenticity of the documents of the evidence being used. This
important in ensuring that the primary sources is not fabricated. On the other hand, internal
criticism examines the truthfulness of the content of the evidence. However, this criticism
requires not just act establishing truthfulness and/or accuracy but also the examinations of the
primary sources in terms of the context of its productions. For example, a historian would have
to situate the documents in the period of its productions. Or in the background of its authors. In
orther words. It should be recognized that facts are neither existing in a vacuum nor produced
from a blank slate. These are products of the time and of the people

In this chapter, we are going to look at a number of primary sources from different historical
periods and evaluate these documents content in terms of historical value, and examine the
context of their productions the primary sources that we going to examine are Antonio
Pigafetta’s first Voyage around the world, Emilio Jacinto’s “Kartilya ng Katipunan” the 1989
declarations of Philippines independence, political cartoon’s Alfred McCoy’s Philippine
cartoons: political caricature of the American Era (1900-1941), and Corazon Aquino’s Speech
before the U.S Congress. These primary sources range from chronicles, officials documents,
speeches , and cartoons to visual arts. Needless to say. Different types of sources necessitate
different kinds of analysis and contain different levels of importance. We are going to explore
that in this chapter.

A brief summary of the first voyage around the world by Magellan by

Antonio Pigafetta
This book was taken was taken from the chronicles of contemporary voyagers and
navigators of the sixteenth century. One of them was Italian nobleman Antonio Pigafetta, who
accompanied Ferdinand Magellan in his fateful circumnavigation of the world. Pigafetta’s work
instantly became a classic that prominent literary men in the west like William Shakespeare
Michel de Montaigne, and Giambattista Vico referred to the book In their interpretation of the
new world. Pigafetta’s travelogue is one most important primary source in the study of the
Precolonial Philippines. His account was also a major referent to the events leading to
Magellan’s arrival in the Philippines, his encounter with local leaders, his death in the hands of
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 documents reveals several insights not just in the character of the
Philippines during the Precolonial period, but also on how the fresh eyes of the Europeans
regard a deeply unfamiliar terrain, environment, people, and culture. Locating Pigafetta’s
account in the context of its writing warrants a familiarity on the dominant frame of mind in the
age of exploration, which pervaded Europe in the fifteenth and sixteenth century, students of
history need to realize that primary sources used in the subsequent written histories depart
from the perspective of Pigafetta himself and was a product of the context of its production.
The first voyage around the world by Magellan was published after Pigafettas returned to Italy.

For this chapter, we will focus on the chronicles of Antonio Pigafetta as he wrote his
firsthand observation and general impressions of the far east including their experiences in the
visayas, in the Visayas. In pigafetta’s account, their fleet reached what he called the Ladrones
Islands or the “island 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, are great thieves, and for the sake of that we called these three islands the
Ladrones Islands.”
The Ladrones islands is presently known as the Marianas islands. These islands are located
south-southeast of Japan, west-southwest of Hawaii north of new Guinea, and east of
Philippines. ten days after they reached Ladrones islands, Pigafetta reported that they reached
what pigafetta called the isle of Zamal, now Samar but Magellan decided to land in another
uninhabited islands for greater security where they could rest for a few days. Pigafetta
recounted that after two days, march 18, nine men came to them and showed joy and
welcomed them with food, drinks, and gifts. In turn, the natives gave them fish(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 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 find certain
threads, with which they make the cords for fastening their boats under this
husk there is another very hard, and thicker than that of walnut they burn this
second rind, and make with it a powder which is useful to them. Under this rind
there is a white marrow of a finger’s thickness, which they eat fresh with meat
and fish, as we do bread, and it has the taste of an almond, and if anyone dried it
he might make bread of it

Pigafetta characterized the people as “very familiar and friendly” and willingly showed
them different islands and the names of these islands. The fleet went Humunu island
(Homonhon) and there they found what Pigafetta referred to as the “watering place of good
signs”. it is in place where Pigafetta wrote that they found the first signs of gold in the island
they named the island with the nearby islands as the archipelago of St. Lazarus. They left the
island, then on march 25th, Pigafetta recounted that they saw two Ballanghai (Barangay), a long
boat full of people in Mazzava /Mazaua. The leader, who Pigafetta referred to as the king
ballanghai (barangay),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 needed provisions of food in chinaware. Magellan exchange gifts robes in
Turkish fashion, red cap, and gave the people knives and mirrors. The two then was fascinated
and remarked that men in such armor could be worth one hundred of his men. Magellan also
shared with the king his charts and maps and shared how they found the islands

after few days, Magellan was introduced to the king’s brother who was also a king of another
island. They went to this islands and Pigafetta reported that they saw mines of gold. The gold
was abundant that parts of the ship and of the house of the second king were made of gold.
Pigafetta described this king as the most handsome of all the men that he saw in this place. He
was also adorned with silk and gold accessories like a golden dagger, which he carried with him
in a wooden polished sheath. This king was named Raia Calambu, king of Zuluan and
Calagan(Butuan and Caragua), and the first ling was Raia Siagu, on March 31 st,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 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 then Mass, Magellan ordered that the cross be brought with nails and crown in the
place. Magellan explained that the cross, the nail, and the crown were the signs of his emperor
and that he was ordered to plant it in the places That he would reach, Magellan further
explained that cross would be beneficial for their people because once other Spaniards saw
this cross, then they would know that they had been in this land and would not cause them
troubles, and any person who might be held captives by them would be released. The king
concurred and allowed for the cross to be planted. This mass would go down in history as the
first mass Philippines, and the cross would be famed Magellan’s cross still preserved at present
day

After seven days, Magellan and his men decided to move and look for islands where
they could acquired more supplies and provisions. They learned of the islands of CEYLON
(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 7 TH OF The same year,
Magellan and his men reached the port of Cebu. The king of Cebu, through Magellan’s
interpreter, demanded that they pay tribute as it was customary, but Magellan refused,
Magellan said that he was captain of a king himself and thus would not pay tribute to other
kings. Magellan’s interpreter explained to the king of Cebu that Magellan’s King was the
emperor of a great empire and that it would do them better to make friends with them than to
forge enmity. The king of Cebu consulted his council. By the next day, Magellan’s Men and the
king of Cebu, Together with other principal men of Cebu, men of Cebu, met in an open space.
There, the king offered a bit of his blood and demanded that Magellan do the same. PIGAFETTA
recounts:

“Then the king said that he was content, and as a greater sign of affections he
sent him a little of his blood from his right arm, and wished he should do the like,
our people answered that he would do it. Besides that, he said that all the
captains who came to his country had been accustomed to make a present to
him, and he to them, and Therefore they should ask their captain if he would
observed 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
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 people wished to
become Christians through their free will and not because they were forced or intimidated

On the 14th of April, the people gathered with the king and other principal men of the
islands. Magellan spoke to the king encouraged him to be a good Christians by burning all the
idols and worship the cross instead. The king of Cebu was then baptized as a Christian.
PIGAFETTA wrote:
“To that the king and all his people answered that thy would obey the
commands of the captain and do all that he told them. The captain took the king
by the hand, and they walked about on the scaffolding, and when he was
baptized he said that he would named him Don Charles (Carlos), as the emperor
his sovereign was named; and he named the the prince Don Fernand (Fernando),
after the brother of the emperor, and the King of Mazavva, Jehan: to the Moor
he gave the name of Christopher, and to others each 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 man was able to speak again. He
called this a miracle.

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

“When we reached land we found the isalnders fifteen hundred in number,

drawn up in three squadrons, they came down upon us with terrible shouts, two
squadrons attacking us on 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 shield made up of thin wood, and perhaps wounded their
arms, yet did not stop them. The captain shouted not to fire, but he was not
listened to. The islanders seeing that the shots of our guns did them little or no
harm would not retire, but shouted more loudly, and springing from one side to
the other to avoid our shots, they at the same time drew nearer to us, throwing
arrows, javelins, spears hardened in fire, stones, and even mud, so that we could
hardly defend ourselves. Some of them cast lances pointed with iron at the
captain-general.

Magellan died in that battle. The natives, perceiving that the bodies of the enemies
were protected with armors, aimed for their legs instead. Magellan was pierced with a
poisoned arrow in his right leg. A few of their men charged at the natives and tried to
intimidate them by burning an entire village but this only enraged the natives further. Magellan
was specifically targeted because the natives knew that he was the captain general. Magellan
was hit with a lance in the face. Magellan retaliated and pierced the same native with his lance
in the breast and tried to draw his sword but could not lift it because of his wounded arm.
Seeing that the captain has already deteriorated, more natives came to attack him. One native
with a great sword delivered a blow in Magellan’s leg, brought him face down and the natives
ceaselessly attacked Magellan with lances, swords, and even with their bare hands. Pigafetta
recounted:

“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 then to give an opportunity for the retreat of his men”.

Pigafetta 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 Barbosaas 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 advise, 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 then
to pay ransom so he would be spared. However, they refused and would not allow anyone to
go 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 on e of the earliest written accounts,
PIGAFETTAS was seen as 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 writing of Philippine history. Nevertheless, there needs to
have more nuanced freading of the source within the contextual backdrop. A student of history
should recognize certain biases accompanying the author and his identity, loyalties, and the
circumstances that he was in; and how it affected that he was a chronicler commissioned by the
King of Spain to accompany and document a voyage intended to expand the Spanish empire.
He was also of noble descent who came from a rich family in Italy. These attributes influenced
his narrative, his selection of details to be included in the text, his characterization of the
people and of the species that he encountered, and his interpretation and retelling of the
events. Being a scholar of cartography and geography, Pigafetta was able to give details on
geography and climate of the places that their voyage had reached.
In reading Pigafetta’s description of the people, one has to keep in mind that he was
coming from the 16th century European perspective. Hence, the reader might notice how
Pigafetta, whether simplicity or explicitly, regarded the indigenous belief systems and way of
life as inferior to that of Christianity and of 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 native’s amazement and illiteracy to the European artillery,
merchandise, and other goods, in the same way that Pigafetta repeatedly mentioned the
abundance of spices like ginger, and of precious metals like gold. His observations and
assessments of the indigenous culture employed the European standards. Hence, when they
saw the indigenous attires of the natives, Pigafetta saw them as being naked because from the
European standpoint, they were wearing fewer clothes indeed. Pigafetta’s perspective was too
narrow to realize that such attire was only appropriate to the tropical climate of the islands. The
same was true for the 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 island.
It should be understood that such observations were rooted from the context of
Pigafetta and 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 of that Christianity were perceived to be blasphemous and barbaric,
even demonic. Aside from this, the 16 th 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 surprisingly therefore that Pigafetta would always
mention of gold in the islands as shown in the description of leaders wearing gold rings and
gold daggers, and of the rich gold mines. An empire like that of the Spain would indeed search
for new lands here they could acquire more gold and wealth to be on top of all European
nations. The obsession with spices might be odd for the 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 more qualified reading of
Pigafetta’s account.

The KKK and the “Kartilya ng Katipunan”

The Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (KKK) or

Katipunan is arguably the most important organization formed in Philippine history. While anti
colonial movements, efforts and organizations had already been established centuries prior to
the foundation of Katipunan, it was only this organization that envisioned (1) a united Filipino
nation that would revolt against the Spaniards for (2) the total independence of the country
from Spain. Previous armed revolts had already occurred before the foundation of the
Katipunan, but none of them envisioned a unified Filipino nation revolting against the
colonizers. For example, Diego SILANG was known as an Ilocano who took up his arms and led
one of the longest running revolts in the country. SILANG, however, was mainly concerned
about his locality and Referred to himself as EL REY de ILOCOS(THE KING OF ILOCOS). The
imaginations of the nation was largely absent in the aspirations of the local revolts before
KATIPUNAN. On the other hand, the propaganda movements led by the ILUSTRADOS like
Marcelo H. del PILAR, GRACIANO Lopez JAENA, and Jose Rizal did not envision a total separation
of the Philippines from SPAIN, But only demanded equal rights, Representations, and
protections from the abuses of the friars.

In the conduct of their struggle, KAPITUNAN created a complex structure and a defined value
system that would guide the organizations as a collective aspiring for single goal. One of the most
important KATIPUNAN documents was the KARTILYA NG KATIPUNAN. The original title of the document
was “MANGA(SIC) KATIPUNAN NG MGA A.N.B” or “lessons of the organizations of the Sons of country.”
The documents was written by EMILIO JACINTO in the 1896. Jacinto was only 18 years old when he
joined the movement. He was 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 organizations and took charge of the
short-lived printing press of the KATIPUNAN. On 15 April 1897, BONIFACIO appointed JACINTO as a
commander of the KATIPUNAN in NORTHERN LUZON, JACINTO was 22 years old. He died of malaria at a
young age of 24 in the town of MAGDALENA, LAGUNA

The KARTIYA 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 KARTILYAA can be classified into two. The first group contains the rules that will
make the member an upright individual and the second group contains the rules that will guide the way
he treats his fellow men.
Below is the translated version of the rules KARTILYA:
I. The life that is not consecrated to a lofty and reasonable purpose is a tree without a shade.
If not a poisonous weed.

II. To do good for personal gain and not for its own sake is not virtue.

III. It is rational to be charitable and love one’s fellow creature and to adjust one’s conduct,
acts and words to what is in itself reasonable

IV. Whether our skin be black or white, we are born equal: superiority in knowledge, wealth
and beauty are to be understood, but not superiority by nature.

V. The honorable man prefers honor to personal gain: the scoundrel, gain to honor

VI. To 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 women and the children, and if the guide
leads to the precipice, those whom he guides will also there.

XI. Thou must not look upon woman as a mere playing, but as a faithful companion who will
share with thee the penalties of life;(physical) weakness will increase thy interest in her and
she will remind thee of the mother who bore thee and reared thee

XII. What thou dost not desire done unto thy wife, children, brothers and sisters, that do not
unto the wife, children, brother and sisters of thy neighbor.

XIII. Man is not worth more because he is a king, because his nose is equaline, and his color
white, not because he is a priest, a servant of God, nor because of the high prerogative that
he enjoys upon the earth, but he is worth most who is a man of proven real value, who does
good, keeps his words, is worthy and honest; he who does nor consent to being oppressed
he who loves and cherishes his fatherland, though he be born in the wilderness and know
no tongue but his own.

XIV. When these rules of conduct shall be known to all, 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 confederated brethren of the same rays, the lives of those who have gone before
the fatigues and the well-paid sufferings will remain. If he who desires to 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 the Katipunan,
properly understanding the Kartilya will thus help in the understanding the values, ideals, aspirations
and even the idealogy of the organization.

Analysis of the “Kartilya ng Katipunan”

Similar to what we have done to the accounts of Pigafetta, this primary source also
needs to be analyzed in terms of content and context. As a document written for a fraternity
whose main purpose is to overthrow a colonial regime, we can explain the content and
provisions of the Kartilya as 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 4 th
and the 13th rules in the Kartilya are an invocation of the inherent equality between and among
men regardless of race, occupation or status. In the context of the Spanish colonial era where
the indios were treated as the inferior of the white Europeans, the Katipunan 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
bourgeoning and liberal ideas in the 18th and 19th century. Equality, tolerance, freedom and
liberty were values that first emerged in the 18 th century French Revolution, which spread
throughout Europe and reached the educated class of the colonies. Jacinto, an ilustrado
himself, certainly got an understanding of these values. Aside from the liberal values that can
be dissected in the document, we can also decipher Victorian and chivalrous values in the text,
For example, various provisions in the Kartilya repeatedly emphasized the importance of honor
in words and in action. The teaching of the Katipunan on how women should be treated with
honor and respect, while positive in many respects and certainly a significant stride from the
practice of raping and physically abusing women in relation to men. For example, in the 10 th
rule, the document specifically stated that men should be guided in the path of evil.
Nevertheless, the same document stated that women should be treated as companions by men
not as playthings that can be exploited for their pleasure.

In the contemporary eyes, the Katipunan can be criticized because of these provisions.
Howver, one must not forget the context where the organization was born. Not even in Europe
or in the whole 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
relected in the Kartilya but also in the organizational structure of the fraternity where 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 1980’s

Aside from this, the Kartilya was instructive not just of the Katipunan conduct toward
other people, but also for the member’s development as individuals in their own rights.
Generally speaking, the rules in the Kartilya can be classified as either direct 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 neighbors wife, children and brothers the way you want yours to
be treated is an instruction on how Katipuneros should treat and regard their neighbors.

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

Reading the “Proclamation of Philippine Independence”

Every year, the country commemorates the anniversary of the Philippine Independence
proclaimed on June 12 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 inspite of the historical importance of the document and
the details that the document reveals on the rationale and circumstances of that historical day
in Cavite. Interestingly, reading the details of the said document in hindsight is telling of the
kind of government that was created under Aguinaldo, and the forthcoming hand of the United
States of America in the next few years of the newly elected 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 the characterization of the conditions in the

Philippines during the Spanish colonial period. The document specifically mentioned abuses and
inequalities in the colony. The declaration says:

“….taking into consideration, that their inhabitants being already weary of

bearing the ominous yoke of Spanish domination, on account of the arbitrary
arrests and harsh treatment practiced by the Civil Guard to the extent of causing
 death with the connivance and even with the express orders of their
commanders, who sometime 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 the 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 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 person accused.”

The above passage demonstrate the justification behind the revolution against Spain.
Specifically cited are the abuse by the Civil Guards of the law between the Filipino people and
the unlawful shooting of prisoners whom they alleged as attempting to escape. The passage
also condemns the unequal protection of the law between the Filipino people and the “eminent
personages.” Moreover, the line mentions the avarice and greed of the clergy like the friars and
the Archbishop himself. Lastly the passage also condemns what they saw as the unjust
deportation and rendering of other decision without proper hearing, expected of any civilized
nation.

From here, the proclamation proceeded with a brief historical overview of the Spanish
occupation since Magellan’s arrival in Visayan until the Philippine Revolution, with specific
details about the latter, especially after the pact of Biak na Bato had collapsed. The document
narrates the spread of the movement “like an electric spark” through different towns and
provinces like Bataan, Pampanga, Batangas, Bulacan, Laguna and Morong, and quick decline of
Spanish forces in the in the same provinces. The revolt also reached Visayas; thus, the
independence of the country was ensured. The document also mentions Rizal execution, calling
it unjust. The execution, as written in the document, was done to “please the greedy body of
friars in their insatiable desire to seek revenge upon and exterminate all those who are
opposed to their Machiavellian purposes, which tramples upon the penal code prescribed for
these islands.” The document also narrates the Cavite Mutiny of January 1872 that caused the
infamous execution of the martyred native priests Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto
Zamora, “whose innocent blood was shed through the intrigues of those so-called religious
orders” that incited the three secular priests in the said mutiny.

The proclamation of independence also invokes that the established republic would be
led under the dictatorship of Emilio Aguinaldo. The first mention was at the very beginning of
the proclamation. It stated:
 “In the town of Cavite Viejo, in this province of Cavite, on the twelfth day of June
eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, before me, Don Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista,
Auditor of War and Special Commissioner appointed to proclaim and solemnize this act
by the Dictatorial Government of these Philippine Islands, for the purpose and by the
virtue of the circular addressed by the Eminent Dictator of the same Don Emilio
Aguinaldo y Family.”

The same was repeated toward the last part of the proclamation. It states:

“We acknowledge, approve and confirm together with the orders that have been issued
therefrom, the Dictatorship established by Don Emilio Aguinaldo, whom we honor as
the Supreme Chief of this nation, which this day commences to have a life of its own, in
the belief that he is the instrument selected by God, in spite of his humble origin, to
effect the redemption of his unfortunate people, as foretold by Doctor Jose Rizal in the
magnificent verses which he composed when he was preparing to be shot, liberating
them from the yoke of Spanish domination in punishment of the impunity which their
Government allowed the commission of abuses by the subordinates.”

Another detail in the proclamation that is worth looking at is its explanation of the
Philippine flag that was first waved on the same day. The document explained:

“ And finally, it was unanimously resolved that this nation, independent from this day,
must use the same flag used heretofore, whose design and colors and described in the
accompanying drawing, with design representing in natural colors the three arms
referred to. The white triangle represents the distinctive emblem of the famous
Katipunan Society, which by means of its compact of blood urged on the masses of the
people to insurrection; the three stars represent the three principal Islands of this
Archipelago, Luzon, Mindanao and Panay, in which this insurrectionary movement broke
out, the sun represents the gigantic strides that have been made by the sons of this land
on the road of progress and civilization, its eight rays symbolizing the eight provinces of
Manila, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna and Batangas, which
were declared in a state of war almost as soon as the first insurrectionary movement
was initiated, the colors blue, red and white, commemorate those of the flag of the
United States of North America, in manifestation of our profound gratitude towards that
Great Nation for the disinterested protection she is extending to us and will continue to
extend to us.”

This often overlooked detail reveals much about the historically accurate meaning
behind the most widely known national symbol in the Philippines. It is not known by many for
example, that the white triangle was derived from the symbol of the Katipunan. The red and
blue colors of the flag are often associated with courage and peace, respectively. Our basic
education omits the fact that those colors were taken from the flag of the United States. While
it can always be argued that symbolic meaning can always change and be reinterpreted, the
original symbolic meaning of something presents us several historical truths that can explain
the subsequent events, which unfolded after the declaration of independence on the 12 th day
of June 1898.

Analysis of the “Proclamation of the Philippines 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
Philippines history. Aside from this, the documents 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 agrarian
crisis felt by the numerous Filipino peasants in the nineteenth century). This is ironic especially
when renowned Philippines revolution for the hope of owning the lands that they were tilling
once the friar estates in different province like BATANGAS and LAGUNA dissolve, if and when
the revolution succeeded. Such aspects and realities of the revolutionary struggle were either
unfamiliar to the middle class revolutionary leaders like Emilio Aguinaldo, AMBROSIO
RIANZARES-BAUTISTA, and FELIPE BUENCAMINO, or were intentionally left or were
intentionally left out because they were landholders themselves.

The treaty of Paris was an agreement signed between Spain and the united states of
America regarding the ownership of the Philippines islands and other Spanish colonies in south
America. The agreement ended the short-lived Spanish- American war. The treaty was signed
on 10 December 1898, six months after the revolutionary government declared the Philippine
independence. The Philippines was sold to the united states at $20 million and effectively
undermined the sovereignty of the Filipinos after their revolutionary victory. The Americans
occupied the Philippines immediately which resulted in the Philippine-American war that lasted
until the earliest years of twentieth century.

The proclamation also gives us the impression on how the victorious revolutionary
government of Aguinaldo historicized the struggle for independence. There were mentions of
past events that were seen as important turning points of the movement against Spain. The
execution of the GOMBURZA, for example, and failed Cavite mutiny of 1872 Was narrated in
detailed. This shows that they saw this event as significant awakening of the Filipinos in the real
conditions of the nation under Spain. Jose Rizal’s legacy and martyrdom was also mentioned in
the document. However, the KATIPUNAN as the pioneer of the revolutionary movement was
only mentioned once toward the end of the document. There was no mention of the
KATIPUNAN’S foundation. BONIFACIO and his co-founders were also left out. It can be argued,
thus, that the way of historical narration found in the document also reflects the politics of the
victors. The enmity between Aguinaldo’s MAGDALO and BONIFACIO’S MAGDIWANG In the
KATIPUNAN is no secrets in the pages of our history. On the contrary, the war led by
Aguinaldo’s men with the forces of the United States were discussed in detail.

The point is, even official records and documents like proclamation of independence,
while truthful most of the, skill exude the politics and biases of whoever is in power. This
manifests in the selectiveness of information that can be found in these records. It is the
selectiveness of information that can be found in these records. It is task of the historian, thus,
to analyze the contexts of people and institutions surrounding it. This tells us a lesson on taking
primary sources like official government records within the circumstance of this production.
Studying one historical subject, thus, entails looking a multiple primary sources and pieces of
historical evidence in order to have a more nuanced and contextual analysis of our past.

A glance at selected Philippines political caricature in Alfred MCCOY’S: political caricature of

the American Era ( 1900-1941)

Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered away from
the classical art by exaggerating human features and poking fun at its subjects. Such art genre
and technique became a part of the print media as a form of social and political commentary,
which usually targets persons of power and authority. Cartoons became an effective tool of
publicizing opinions through heavy use of symbolism, which is different from a verbose written
editorial and captures the audience’s imagination is reason enough of historian 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 Philippines cartoons: political caricature of the American Era( 1900-1941),
Alfred MCCOY, together with ALFREDO ROCES, compiled political cartoons published in
newspaper dailies and periodicals in the aforementioned time period. For this part, we are
going to look at selected cartoons and explain the context of each one.
 The first example shown above was published in The Independent on May 20,1916. The
cartoon shows a politician from TONDO, named Dr. SANTOS, passing his crown to his brother-
in-law, Dr. Barcelona, a Filipino guy (as depicted wearing SALAKOT and barong tagalong) was
trying to stop Santos, telling the letter to stop giving BARCELONA the crown because it is not his
to begin with.

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

The third cartoon was a commentary on the unprecedented cases COLORUM

AUTOMOBILES in the city. Streets. The Philippine free press published this commentary when
fatal accidents involving COLORUM vehicles and taxis occurred too often already.
 This fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up police officer was at screen saying
that couples are not allowed to neck and make love in the theater. Two youngsters 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 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 the time.

The last cartoon was published by Lipang Kalabaw on 24 August 1907. In the picture, we
can see Uncle Sam rationing porridge to the politicians and members of the Progresista Party
look on and wait for their turn. This cartoon depicts the patronage of the United States being
coveted by politicians from either of the party.

Analysis of the political caricatures during the American period

The transition from the Spanish colonial period to the American occupation period
demonstrated different strands of changes and shifts in culture, society and politics. The
Americans drastically introduced democracy to the nascent nation and the consequences were
far from ideal aside from this, it was also during the American period that Filipino 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
most-Filipinos-American period in the Philippines were experienced differently by Filipinos
coming different classes. The upper PRINCIPALIA class experienced economic prosperity with
the opening up of the Philippines 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
Philippines 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 of the
Filipinos paid for the democracy modeled after the Americans. First, it seemed that the Filipino
politicians at that time did not understand well enough the essence of democracy and the

Accompanying democratic institutions and processes. This can be seen in the rising
dynastic politics in Tondo as depicted in the cartoon published by The Independent. Patronage
also became influential and powerful, not only between clients and patrons but also between
the newly formed political parties composed of the elite and the United STATES. This was
depicted in the cartoon where the United States, represented by Uncle Sam, provided dole outs
for members of the. FEDERALISTA while the NACIONALISTA politicians looked on and WAITED
for their turn. Thus, the essence of competing political parties to enforce choices among the
votes was cancelled out. The problem continues up to the present where politicians transfer
from one part to another depending on which party was powerful in specific on time.

Thetransition. From a catholic-centered, Spanish- Filipino society to an imperial

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

Lastly, the cartoon also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the Philippines now
governed by United States. From the looks of it, nothing much has changed. For example, a
cartoon, depicted how police authorities oppress pretty Filipino criminals while turning a blind
eye on HOARDERS who monopolize goods in their huge warehouse(presumably Chinese
merchants). The other cartoon depicts how Americans controlled Filipinos through seemingly
harmless American objects. By controlling their consciousness and mentality, Americans hot
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 EDSA people 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 the antithesis of the dictator. Her image as a mourning,
window housewife who had always been in the shadow of her husband and relatives and
relatives and had no experience in politics was juxtaposed against Marco’s statesmanship,
eloquence, charisma, and cunning political skills. Nevertheless, CORY was able to capture the
imaginations of the people whose rights and freedom had long been compromised throughout
of the people regime. This is despite the fact that CORY came from 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. Protects from different sectors frequented different areas in the country. Marco’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 snap Election in February
1986, where Corazon CONJUAGCO AQUINO, the window of the slain senator was convinced to
run against Marcos. The canvassing was rigged to Marco’s favor but the people expressed their
protects against the corrupt and authoritarian government. Leading military officials of the
regime and martial law ORCHESTRACTOR themselves, Juan Ponce ENRILE and Fidel V. Ramos
plotted to take presidency, until civilians heeded the call of then Manila archbishop Jaime
cardinal sin and other civilian leader 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 after 21 years.

On 18 September 1986, seven months since CORY became president, she went to the
United States and spoke before that 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 three times that they lost NINOY including his demise
on 23 August 1983. The first time was when the dictatorship detained NINOY with other
dissenters. CORY related:

“The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked him
up in a, nearly airless cell in a military camp in the north. They stripped him
naked and held a threat of a sudden midnight execution over his head. NINOY
 held up manfully under all of it. I barely did as well for forty-three days, the
authorities would not tell me what had happened to him. This was the first my
children and I felt we had lost him.”

CORY continued that when NINOY survived that first detention, he was then charged of
subversion , murder, and other crimes. He was tried by a military court, whose legitimacy
NINOY adamantly questioned. To solidify his protest, NINOY decided to a hunger strike and
fasted for 40 days. CORY treated this event as the second time that their family lost NINOY. She
said:

“When that didn’t work, they put him on trial for subversion murder and a host
of other crimes before a military commission NINOY challenge its authority and
went on a fast. If he survived it, then he felt God intended him for another fate.
We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back from his determination
to see his fast through to the end. He stopped only when it dawned on him that
government would keep his body alive after the fast had destroyed his brain.
And so, with barely any life in his body, he called off the fast on the 40 th 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 agrued:

“I held fast to Ninoy’s conviction thet I must be by the ways of democracy. I

heled out for participataion in the 1984 election the dictatorship called, even if I
knew it would be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of the opposition, that I
ran the grave risk of legitimizing the foregone results of elections that were
clearly going to be fraudulent. But I was not fighting for lawyers but for the
people in whose intelligence, I had implicit faith. By the exercise of democracy
even in a dictatorship, they would be prepared for democracy when it came. And
then also, it was the only way I knew by wich we could measure our power even
in the terms dictated by the dictatorship. The people vindicated me in an
 election shamefully marked by government thuggery and fraud. The
opposition swept the elections, garnering a clear majority of the votes even if
they ended up (thanks to a corrupt Commission on Elections) with barely a third
of the seats in Parliament. Now, I knew our power.”

Cory talked about her miraculous victory through the people’s struggle and continued
talking about her earliest initiatives as the president of a restored democracy. She stated that
she intended to forge and draw reconciliation after a bloody and polarizing dictatorship. Cory
emphasized the importance of the EDSA Revolution in terms of being a “limited revolution that
respected the life and freedom of every Filipino. She also boasted of the restoration of a fully
constitutional government whose constitution gave utmost respect to the Bill of Rights. She
reported to the U.S Congress.

“Again as we restore democracy by the ways of democracy, so are completing

the constitutional structures of our new democracy under a constitution that
already gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A jealously independent
constitutional commission is completing its draft which will be submitted later
this year to popular referendum. When it is approved, there will be elections for
both national and local positions. So, within about a year from a peaceful but
national upheaval that overturned a dictatorship, we shall have returned to full
constitutional government.”

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

“My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist insurgency

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

Cory peace agenda involves political initiative and re-integration program to persuade
insurgents to leave the countryside and return to the mainstream society to participate in the
restoration of democracy. She invoked the path of peace because she believed that it was the
moral path that a moral government must take. Nevertheless, Cory took a step back when she
said that while peace is the priority of her presidency ,she “will not waiver” when freedom and
democracy are threatened. She said that, similar to Abraham Lincolin, she understand that
“force may be necessary before mercy” and while she did not relish the idea, she “will do
whatever it takes to defend the integrity and freedom of (her) country.”
 Cory then turned to the controversial topic of the Philippines foreign debt amounting to
$26 billion at the time of her speech. This debt had ballooned during the Marcos regime. Cory
expressed her intention to honor those debts despite mentioning that the people did not
benefit from such debts. Thus she mentioned her protestations about the way the Philippines
was deprived of choices to pay those debts within the capacity of the Filipino people. She
lamented:

“Finally may I turn to that other slavery, our twenty-six billion dollar foreign
debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet, the means by which we shall be able
to do so are kept from us. Many of the conditions imposed on the previous
government that stole this debt, continue to be imposed on us who never
benefited from it.”

She continued that while the country had experienced the calamities brought about by
the corrupt dictatorship of Marcos, no commensurate assistance was yet to be extended to the
Phillippines. She even remarked that given the peaceful characters 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 improverished village. They

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

Cory proceeded in enumerating the challenges of the Filipino people as they tried
building the new democracy. These were the persisting communist urgency and the economic
deterioration. Cory further lamented that these problems worsened by the crippling debt
because half of the country export earning amounting to $2 billion would “go to pay just the
interest on a debt whose benefit the Filipino people never received.” Cory then asked a rather
compelling question to the U.S Congress:

“Has there been a grater test of national commitment to the ideals you hold
dear than that my people have gone through? You have spent many lives and
much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant to receive it.
 And here ,you have a people who want it by themselves and need only the help
to preserve it.”

Cory ended her speech by thanking America for serving as home to her family for what
she referred to as the “three happiest years of our lives together.” She enjoined America in
building the Philippines as a new home for democracy and in turning the country as a “shining
testament of our two nations commitment to freedom.”

Analysis of Cory Aquino’s Speech

Cory Aquino’s speech was an important event in the political and diplomatic history of the
country because it has arguably cemented the legitimacy of the EDSA government in the
international arena. The speech talks of her family background, especially her relationship with
her late husband, Ninoy Aquino. It is well known that it was Ninoy who served as the real
leading figure of the opposition at the time. Indeed, Ninoy’s eloquence and charisma could very
well compete with that Marcos. In her speech, Cory talked at length about Ninoy’s toil and
suffering at the hands of the dictatorship that he resisted. Even when she proceeded talking
about her new government, she still went back to Ninoy’s legacies and lessons. Moreover, her
attribution of the revolution to Ninoy’s death demonstrates not only Cory’s personal perception
on the revolution, but since she was the president, it also represent what the dominant
discourse was at that point in our history.

The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also be seen in
the same speech. Aquino was able to draw the sharp contrast between her government and of
her predecessor by expressing her commitment to a democratic constitution drafted by an
independent commission. She claimed that such constitution upholds and adheres to the rights
and liberty of the Filipino people. Cory also hoisted herself as the reconciliatory agent after
more than two decades of a polarizing authoritarian politics. For example, Cory saw the blown-
up communist insurgency as a product of a repressive and corrupt government. Her response
to this insurgency rooted from her diametric opposition of the dictator initiating reintegration
of communist rebels to the mainstream Philippine society. Cory claimed that her main
approach to this problem was through peace and not through the sword of war.

Despite Cory’s effort to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her speech still
revealed certain parallelisms between her and the Marcos government. This is seen in terms of
continuing the alliance between the Philippines and the United States despite the known
affinity between the said world super power and Marcos. The Aquino regime, as seen in Cory
acceptance of the invitation to address the U.S Congress and to the content of the speech
decided to build and continue with alliance between the Philippines and the United states and
effectively implemented an essentially similar foreign policy to that of the dictatorship. For
example, Cory recognized that the large sum of foreign debts incurred by the Marcos regime
never benefitted the Filipino people. Nevertheless, Cory expressed that there was a choice of
waiving the said debt because those were the debt off the dictator and not of the contry. Cory
decision is an indicator of her government 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.