HISTORY OF COLONIALISM AND STRUGGLE :

LOCAL STREAMS IN PHILIPPINE NATIONALISM

(Prepared for the 1999 Ibon Philippine Educators Training, Baguio City. )

Rowena Reyes-Boquiren, Ph.D.

Division of Social Sciences
University of the Philippines College Baguio

I. INTRODUCTION

Peasant movements constitute either an ignored, or at worst, a romanticized aspect of

Philippine social history. These local streams in our historical experience as a people are
often construed as limited, loosely organized, or even as fanatic movements. Yet, many of
these past experiences repeatedly point to unceasing attempts in transforming the character of
peasant movements from their narrow and simple beginnings, toward becoming more
comprehensive in scope and coordinated in approach. By itself, the
history of peasant struggles forms the continuing thread in the formation of our national
identity as well as in the realization of our nationalist aspirations.

An attempt to review the dynamics of peasant initiatives, as is presented here, is useful for
understanding the fit between local and national history. A survey of these numerous peasant
movements, summarized even further with the help of location maps (from F. E.
Marcos, Tadhana, The History of the Filipino People(Manila : 1976) is provided as part of this
paper to aid the presentation. The data used in the paper come mainly from Vol. II Part Two of
this work, articles from LIKAS Dyornal ng Kasaysayan I:1 (Quezon City :1976); David
Sturtevant’s Agrarian Unrest in the Philippines : The Guardia de Honor – Revitalization within
the Revolution and Rizalistas - Contemporary Revitalization Movements in the
Philippines (1969); B. Kerkvliet’s The Huk Rebellion: A Study of Peasant Revolt in the
Philippines, (Berkeley : University of California Press, 1977); UP College Baguio, Ulat sa
Ikatlong Pambansang Kumperensya ng Sentenaryo ng Rebolusyong 1896(Baguio City :
1995); and D. Tolentino’s Resistance and Revolution in the Cordillera (Baguio City : 1995).

The paper addresses three main objectives :

1. to show, geographically, the extent of peasant movements in the Philippines during the
colonial and post-colonial period;
2. to account for the concrete political, economic, and social conditions which gave rise to
these peasant responses;
3. to identify common features in these peasant movements toward a better
understanding of the peasantry in the Philippines.
II. REVITALIZATION MOVEMENTS AND THE AGRARIAN PROBLEM

Taking off from the direction in the writing of Philippine social history since the late ‘60s, it
is notable that peasant movements have come to be regarded as nothing but nativistic, messianic
or irrational incidents that come and go. Indeed, these types of movements dominated an early
part of our experience as a colonized people.

Anthony Wallace uses the term "revitalization movement" to refer to these phenomena, by
which he means "a deliberate, conscious effort by members of a society to construct a more
satisfying culture." He further suggests the use of the term nativistic to refer to those
movements which tend to emphasize the elimination of alien persons, customs and
values; revitalistic if the movement tends to revive moribund customs, values, and even aspects
of nature; and messianic if there is a saviour in human flesh involved (A. Wallace, American
Anthropologist 58:2, 1952).

Not all peasant movements in the archipelago will classify as part of the revitalization
movement, particularly the truly agrarian struggles since the turn of the century and particularly
under the American colonial period as a result of the feudal character of the Philippine economy.
The post-colonial era, meanwhile, has produced a semi-feudal mode of production characterized
by the dominance of imperialism over the underdeveloped local economies with feudal relations
as social base. Heightened militancy and radicalism have characterized peasant movements in
the post-colonial era under semi-feudal modes of exploitation.

III. PEASANT MOVEMENTS IN THE COLONIAL AND POST-COLONIAL PERIODS

The streams in peasant movements may be traced in several periods, which reflect qualitative
changes in the political, socio-cultural and economic conditions.

A. 1565-1663

Peasant movements within this period were generally characterized as immediate reactions
to the different aspects of colonialism and the state that the local communities were confronting
at the time of contact.

The revolts were brought about largely as a result of:

1. oppression through colonial policies such as the tribute, bandala (or reales
compras) , polo, and other extractions;
2. (reaction to) the alien character of the new state imposed upon the people (this was true
among the dispossessed datu and maharlika class, and may have been a deeper
motivation); and
3. negation of ancient ways and beliefs (as foreign values and customs were thrust upon the
country, resulting in social disorientation).
 In particular instances, the revolts differed in the specific mixture of the elements that went
into their making. Nonetheless, it will be useful to summarize the general character of and
directions in these peasant movements.

Revolts in LUZON were generally more political in character, specifically within the old
Pampanga-Manila-Mindoro area of state construction. In Ilocos, meanwhile, revolts
constituted a religio-cultural, nativistic negation of Hispanic cultural predominance.

In the VISAYAS, nativistic sentiment was much stronger than elsewhere, as indicated in
the fact that the communities sought in the ancient religion and culture the
strength and resources for the struggle against Spanish political and cultural dominance.

Date Description of struggle Base and scope

LUZON REVOLTS
June 1571 MACABEBES led by "the King of Macabebes" Tondo
(3 days) Some 2,000 Macababe warriors (from Pampanga), (Manila-Mindoro
a reaction against foreign political set-up and religion; circumference area)
quelled by Pintados and Spanish soldiers under Goiti
August 1571 Tagalogs Cainta
1574 Manila Revolt led by Lakan Dula, involving some Navotas (Manila)
10,000 natives (during Limahong's attacks) as reactions to Cavite, Batangas,
against Spanish officials extractions of food supply; and Mindoro
turned out to be anti-Spanish (civil officials and priests)
1585 TONDO CONSPIRACY (of all the datus of the (1st Manila, Batangas,
attempt) Pampanga and Tagalog Region) to expel the Cavite, Laguna,
Spaniards led by Agustin de Legazpi, Martin Panga. Bulacan
1587 (Second attempt) led by Magat Salamat - with the help
of the Japanese at first, and then of the Borneans
1584 *Because of the famine caused by the polo Pampanga
1580s Reported: numerous revolts in Cagayan and Ilocos as
initial reactions to colonial policies
1596 Magalat Cagayan
1607 "Chief of Malaguey" Cagayan
1643 led by Don Pedro Ladia, nativist political revolt with Bulacan
religious undertones. Ladia claimed the right to be
"King over the provinces of the Tagalogs" in his appeal
to the ancient indigenous religion
1645 led by "an Indian sorcerer," *nativist, religious (kill the Nueva Ecija
Spaniards and the religion which caused the people (Gapan in Pampanga
disaster, "slay the fathers and burn the churches") then)
1660 MANIAGO REVOLT (was actually a non-revolt) Pampanga, with
led by Don Francisco Maniago, initially caused by contacts in
natives' protest against the polo and bandala, later Pangasinan, the
became a struggle to free the natives from Spanish Ilocos and Cagayan
rule. The rebels were weakened by Gov. de Lara's
cooperation of Arayat chief Macapagal.
 PANGASINAN REVOLT (Malong) led by Don Andres Pangasinan
Malong, the "King of Pangasinan" with some 11,000
men in all. Called for the elimination of the Spanish
civil bureaucracy, in place of which Malong set up a
rudimentary one consisting of a count, a judge, and
army generals based at "Palapag"; his weakness: he
spared the religious which was why he did not have a
committed following.
GUMAPOS, with the help of Zambals and de Vera Ilocos and Cagayan
ILOCOS REVOLT led by Pedro Almazan, "King of the Ilocos
Ilocos", with the help of Isnegs; response to Malong's
appeal
VISAYAN REVOLTS
1588 minor revolts against colonial policies Cebu, Panay, other
Visayan islands
1621 TAMBLOT REVOLT of 2,000 men led by the babaylan Bohol
Tamblot, called for the rejection of Catholic religion,
people to rise up against the Spaniards. Tamblot
reported the appearance of a diwata who promised the
natives a life of happiness and abundance "without
paying tribute to the Spaniards or dues to the churches"
BANCAO, a chief of Limasaua, led a nativistic Leyte
movement. He erected a temple to the diwata and called
on the people to destroy church property.
1649-1650 SUMUROY REVOLT led by the father of Sumuroy Samar, Leyte, Albay,
and himself, Don Juan Ponce, Don Pedro Camuug, Camarines Sur,
against thepolo, but with a nativistic, anti-friar Bohol, Cebu, Iligan,
impulsion behind it. Camiguim, Surigao
and Zamboanga
DABAO ("tricky Dabao"), from Butuan to Cebu, Northern Mindanao
through Leyte and Samar, and parts of Bicol: the
territory of the ancient Visayan rajahs
1663 TAPAR REBELLION led by the sorcerer Tapar who Panay
went around as a woman, as a babaylan; nativist, with
Christian organizational scheme inspiration. He taught
his followers to worship idols, performed prodigies
resembling miracles, and became a prophet. He
promised the natives:
a . a life of abundance (leaves into fish,
coconut fiber into linen)
b. that they won't be hit/won't die when hit by
Spanish muskets; those who will die in the
rebellion will live again.
Tapar as the "Eternal Father," among his
followers were assigned a "Son," a "Holy Ghost," a
"Virgin Mary," twelve apostles, a "Pope," several
 bishops

From the data, it may be said therefore that during the first century of Spanish rule, the
farther the rebellions were from the Manila provinces, the less political and more religious-
cultural they became. The remoter ones were also more inward looking, a retreat into the socio-
cultural fortress rather than an attack against the colonial state.

B. 1663-1765

The revolts toward the 18th century differed from the earlier ones in that they were more
intense, more widespread, and longer in duration. The following were the common features in
these revolts:

1. They revealed direct links between the pre-Spanish centers of state construction and
the aspirations of the leaders (for a return to the pre-colonial society/situation)
2. They also endeavored to achieve hegemony on a regional scope
3. All were rural-based, and had as aim the restitution of lands and the amelioration of
the plight of the impoverished peasants.
4. There evolved a new pattern of resistance which unified the
kasama and principalia against the colonial society in the
Tagalog area, the kailianes andbabacnang of Ilocos; the peasants and
the anacbanuas of Pangasinan, the Timauas and ethnic (tribal) groups of Cagayan.
(Prior to this period, the revolts were characterized as
conflicts between the peasantry and the whole colonial machinery - which included
the principalesto some extent. )
5. All revolts also revealed the schism within the principalia (which the religious orders
fomented), and thus gave birth to the confrontation between opposition and collaboration
as tendencies of the elite.
6. To some extent, there was also some sort of an awakening which took place among the
"abogadillos" and "apo de radillos" who assisted those who joined in the struggle (this
being an indication of a positive desire to assert native identity against the political
power of the colonizer). In this alliance prefigured the future revolutionary coalition
between the peasant movement and the expanded ilustrado- principalia of the 19th
century .

Three types of revolt characterized movements during the period:

1. the essentially agrarian uprisings in 1745 in the Tagalog regions
2. the political revolts which took place mainly in Northern Luzon
3. the culturally-controlled rebellion in Bohol which lasted for almost 80 years

Date Description of struggle Base and scope

LUZON & VISAYAN REVOLTS
1718 Itaves and Irraya led by Luis Magtangaga; a nativist- Cagayan Valley
religious, anti-Christian movement, brought about by
 worsening conditions : economic crisis brought about by
crop failure, excessive oppression by the Alcalde
Mayor Zorilla (high prices, excessive/ arbitrary grain-
tribute, and personal services)
1718 signs of restiveness in the Visayas reported Cebu, Cainta
Oton, Negros in Manila
1718-1719 Caragay (a social bandit), in reaction against oppressive Pangasinan
acts of Alcalde-Mayor Antonio del Valle
1745-1745 TAGALOG AGRARIAN UPRISING to recover the Tagalog Area
communal lands system on account of the gradual
encroachment of the religious haciendas viz. the
Hispanic proprietary rights and customs.
1759 LACAADEN, and KIDIT wage attacks against Benguet
religious and punitive missions in Tonglo and its
neighboring villages in the Mount Santo Tomas area
1762-1764 PALARIS led by Juan dela Cruz Palaris Binalatongan in
(formerly a timawa, but now of the principalia); Don Pangasinan
Andres Lopez (also of the principalia, in alliance with
brother), and Juan de Vera Oncantin
1744-1829 DAGOHOY, assisted by some members of the Bohol
principalia: Calixto Sotero of Tagbilaran, Captain
Miguelillo and Yslao of Baclayon, Pedro Cortez Flores,
Lazaro Sotario, and Narciso delos Santos of
Dauis, Bohol has a heroic tradition-although situated on
the seashore, the Moros never infested it.

C. 1765-1815

Manifestations of the growing nationalism were in the form of mass uprisings as a result
of intensifying colonial exploitation in view of new economic orientation which the influence
of the physiocrats in Europe brought about. The stress on monocropping-based commercial
agricultural production and exchange did not only expand to become region-wide (hence, the
regionalization of commodity production along a few select export crops like coconut, tobacco,
sugarcane and cotton), but it also intensified land concentration among fewer families and
religious corporations through the sanglang-bili and outright landgrabbing, The more known
revolts during the period were the following:
 Date Description of struggle Base and scope
1807 BASI REVOLT Ilocos
*reaction to the government wine monopoly

1815 SARRAT REBELLION Ilocos

*anti-cacique
opted for egalitarian society, but within
(context of) Spanish colonial state

D. 1815-1872

The period is characterized by the emergence of a counter-consciousness, a developing

national identity which frontally confronted the instruments of colonial control. The key
institutions which became targets of struggles were the church in the form of the secularization
movement as well as the reform movement in the legislative and judicial functions of the
colonial government through lobbying and tirade by the insulares (Philippine-born Spaniards)
and Spanish mestizos.

Date Description of struggle Base and scope

1839-1841 COFRADIA de SAN JOSE Tayabas
led by Hermano Pule (Apolinario dela Cruz)
Hermano de la Archi-Cofradia del Glorioso
Senor San Jose y de la Virgen del Rosario
(Brotherhood of the Great Sodality of the Glorious Lord
Saint Joseph and of the Virgin of the Rosary)

Hermano Pule’s Cofradia de San Jose started as an open, devotional organization in late 1840.
It later became some sort of a secret movement. By 1841 it began to espouse armed
confrontation with the colonial authorities. It became known as a colorum movement as it
spread to Tayabas, Laguna, and Batangas.

This was clearly a semi-nativistic confraternity in the sense that it had syncretic elements
of both the Christian and native religions. Yet, it was a direct
challenge to the ecclesiastical status quo, in that its organization and activities were
directed to the pursuit of the limited goal of creating within the Church a
satisfactory environment for religious expression in which a Filipino leadership could
function without the handicaps created by the religious orders (viz, the Dominicans).

It was also proto-political in the sense that although it had an organizational machinery, this
was still not broad-based and had not formulated a program. Pule had connections with the
creole Domingo de Ropjas of Manila and his secular priest. This movement was confronted by
state (and Church) repression.

In the urban centers, the secularization movement was characterized by student and youth
organizing in support of the demand to cut the control by religious corporations over the local
churches and greater participation by the Insulares and half-breeds in the administrative
functions of government.

E. 1872-1896

Uprisings during this period merged with initiatives of the urban middle
class, which eventually saw the outbreak of the revolution in 1896. The merging of the anti-
feudal, anti-cleric and anti-colonial character of social movements was finally achieved within
the last decade of the 19th century, not only through the Katipunan-led organization but even
moreso by the peasant movements that presaged it.

Papa Isio’s movement was clearly a separatist movement at the start which mobilized under
the slogan "Long Live Rizal, Long Live the Free Philippines," "Down with the Spaniards." As
Papa Isio promised, " the lands would be partitioned among the people, that machinery would
no longer be permitted on the island, and that nothing but palay would henceforth be planted."

Date Description of struggle Base and scope

1872-1910 GUARDIA de HONOR Pangasinan,
1872-1882 Originally a loyalist group created by the Dominican La Union
friars, designed to promote Christian values, with
clerical sanction.
1883-1896 Became a millenarian movement under the
leadership of a charismatic couple, faith healers "Apo
Laqui" (Julian Baltazar) and his blind wife.
1896-1910 Anti-cacique (by 1900s)
1886-1889 DIOS BUHAWI Negros
1889 CA MARTIN Negros
1887-1907 BABAYLANES (or PULAHANES or MONTESCAS Negros
or CIVIL)
*Led by PAP ISIO (Dionisio Magbuelas; Sigobelya)

It eventually developed into an anti-protestant and anti-foreign movement (haciendas

owned by the natives were not touched, unless the owners of these cooperated with the enemies).

F. 1896-1930s

The intrusion of Americans in the revolution against Spain saw

the systematic weakening of the Philippine revolutionary forces. During the crucial period
of intense American pacification campaigns within the first decade of the 1900s, these local,
nativistic and/or millenarian movements provided for the continuity in the national
struggle while the resistance of the forces of Aguinaldo was being undermined. The
resurgence of militant nationalism from the ranks of Aguinaldo accordingly saw the renewed
links of the local movements with the national struggle.
 However, the establishment of the colonial order under the Americans did not wipe out
the local movements even during the early decades of US imperialism in the Philippines. Not
only were the local movements sustained despite the United States' policy of benevolent
assimilation amidst the period of suppressed nationalism. Despite the assertion of several
counter-revolutionary measures such as the Flag Law, the Brigandage Act, and the
Reconcentration Act, peasant movements showed even higher levels of militancy
especially in the 1930s when the direction towards socialist demands began to be articulated
nationally and internationally.

Date Description of struggle Base and scope

1890-1910 SANTA IGLESIA led by Apo Ipe (Felipe Salvador Pampanga,
* land; * separatist Bulacan, Tarlac
1990s PULAHANES Cebu
(Quintin and Anacleto Tabal)
1901-1903 PAPA RIOS (Ruperto Rios; Generalissimo Vice- Tayabas
Regente a Dios)
* independence; resistance movement with semi-
religious features
1901-1904 KRISTONG ITIM (Jose Zadie) Manila
* independence (in giving financial support to Filipinos
fighting against the US colonial order)
1902-1907 DIOS DIOS (PULAHANES) Leyte
PAPA FAUSTINO (Faustino Ablen)
1902-1911 DIOS DIOS led by PAPA Pablo (Pablo Bulan) Samar
1910-1924 Visayas and Laureano Solano assisted by Felix Bernales Northern
Lantayug, the "reincarnation of Rizal") Mindanao
1925-1927 YNTRENCHERADISTA Movement Iloilo, Negros
Florencio I (Yntrencherado)
1920s COLORUM, PULAHANES Leyte, Samar
Sociedad de la Confianza
Caballeros de la sagrada familia Pampanga,
Bulacan,
Pangasinan, Nueva
Ecija
Other groups in Rizal, Tarlac, Pangasinan, La Union,
Batangas, Surigao, Agusan, Cotabato, Samar, Leyte,
Laguna
1923-1925 SAN JOSE UPRISING led by Pedro Kabola Nueva Ecija
agrarian (anti-cacique); libertarian (anti-colonial)
1928-1931 TAYUG (Colorum) Pangasinan
Led by Pedro Calosa
(Also known as Sociedad ti Mannalon ti Sinarauay, it
lasted for less than a day)

Before the end of 1920s, two important movements emerged to link the local rural and urban-
based movements of the peasantry, urban intellectuals and the working class with the
international struggle against imperialism : the Socialist Party of the Philippines established in
1929 with largely a peasant mass base, and in 1930, the Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas with a
strong intellectual and urban working class membership.

G. 1930s to 1946

While the nativistic, millenarian and messianic peasant movements persisted in the
countrysides and a number of urban centers, strikes and mass demonstrations became the main
forms of struggle of the peasantry particularly from Central Luzon led by the AMT (Aguman
ding Maldang Talapagobra or League of Poor Laborers) and the KPMK (Kapisanang Pambansa
ng Magbubukid sa Pilipinas or National Peasants Union). The 1938 merger of the SP and PKP
gave the peasant movement an even stronger resolve to engage the landlords in test court cases
and pit political strength with traditional politicians in Central Luzon politics where socialists
won many seats for the first time. Close to the 1940s, these forces began to consider guerilla war
as a strategy, a direction that was finally realized through the Hukbalahap (Hukbong
Mapagpalaya Laban sa Hapon) in the face of Japan’s aggressiveness. The Japanese interregnum
caused even the most militant and radical peasant movements under the merged SP and PKP to
support the Allied forces during the second imperialist world war.

H. POST-COLONIAL MOVEMENTS

Independence did not resolve the basic problems confronting Philippine society. Since 1946,
the basic problem of feudalism which colonialism extended throughout the archipelago has been
sustained despite the granting of independence because of the expansive control of imperialism
over all aspects of life in the country. The resulting unevenness in the development of
productive forces has allowed the continuation of exploitative relations under the rubric of semi-
feudalism characterized by imperialist control over the country’s economy, culture and politics;
merchant and comprador bourgeois exploitation through the overpricing of basic consumer
goods and underpricing of local products and services, and usury.

Mass movements of the working classes in both urban centers and the countryside persist in
their struggle for basic human rights, democratic rights to land, just wages, and descent working
as well as living conditions. Since the 1970s, even cultural minority groups have actively
launched their struggle for the recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights to land and resources,
foremost of which are the struggles of the Filipino Muslims, the cultural minorities in the Central
Cordillera or the Igorots, and those of northern Mindanao and the Visayas or the Lumads.

IV. POSTSCRIPT

The basic problems besetting Philippine society are perceived today no longer as segregated
concerns but as inter-related issues rooted in the semi-feudal mode of production. The religious-
cultural as well as political motivations behind peasant movements in the country continue
alongside the more economically oriented struggles of the basic sectors.

From the attempted reconstruction of the streams of peasant movements and related urban
struggles, it is evident that social movements began as religious-cultural or predominantly
economic or political motivations behind the locally-based anti-colonial struggles in the late
16th to early 17th centuries. These had progressed into the regionally and eventually nationally
shared goals of independence and tenurial security by the late 19th century. Since the start of the
20th century, social movements have expanded toward becoming internationally linked in the
struggle against imperialist domination and feudal exploitation.