Ge112 Week 7 11

SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, INC.
National Highway, Crossing Rubber, Tupi, South Cotabato
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

___________________________________________________
LEARNING MODULE
FOR
GE 112: READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY
_____________________________________________________
WEEK 7
GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

Page 1 of 28
COURSE OUTLINE
COURSE CODE : GE 112

TITLE : READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY
TARGET POPULATION : All First Year Students
INSTRUCTOR : NIKKA C. CATAHUM, LPT
Overview:
The focus of the course is to develop historiographical skills connected to context and
content analysis, applying both analytical strategies in themes and topics across the Philippine
past. Primary sources will be the ultimate bridge between the past and the present, allowing
spaces for students to simply not parrot facts about the past but to gain knowledge that can be
used in proposing solutions to the problems of today.
Objectives:
General Objective
To develop the historical and critical consciousness of the students so that they will
become versatile, articulate, broadminded, morally upright and responsible citizens.
The following are the topics to be discussed
Week 7: CASE STUDY 1: WHERE DID THE FIRST CATHOLIC MASS TAKE
PLACE IN THE PHILIPPINES?
Week 8: CASE STUDY 2: DID RIZAL RETRACT?
Week 9: CASE STUDY 3: WHERE DID THE CRY OF REBELLION HAPPEN?
Week 10: 1987 CONSTITUTION OF BIAK NA BATO
1899 MALOLOS CONSTITUTION
1935 COMMONWEALTH CONSTITUTION
Week 11: 1973 CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITARIANISM
CONSTITUTTION AFTER MARTIAL LAW
ATTEMPTS TO AMEND OR CHANGE THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
Instruction to the Learners
Each chapter in this module contains a lesson involving the history of the Philippines. The
units are characterized by continuity, and are arranged in such a manner that the present unit
is related to the next unit. For this reason, you are advised to read this module. After each unit,
there are exercises to be given. Submission of task given will be every Monday during your
scheduled class hour.

Page 2 of 28
WEEK 7
CASE STUDY 1: WHERE DID THE FIRST CATHOLIC MASS TAKE PLACE IN THE
PHILIPPINES
Butuan has long been believed as the site of the first Mass. In fact, this has been the case
for three centuries, culminating in the erection of a monument in 1872 near Agusan River,
which commemorates the expedition’s arrival and celebration of Mass on 8 April 1521.
Toward the end of the nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth century, together
with the increasing scholarship on the history of the Philippines, a more nuanced reading of the
available evidence was made, which brought to light more considerations in going against the
more accepted interpretation of the first Mass in the Philippines, made both by Spanish and
Filipino scholars.
It must be noted that there are only two primary sources that historians refer to in
identifying the site of the first Mass. One is the log kept by Francisco Albo, a pilot of one of
Magellan’s ship, Trinidad. He was one of the 18 survivors who returned with Sebastian Elcano
on the ship Victoria after they circumnavigated the world. The other, and the more complete,
was the account by Antonio Pigafetta, Primo viaggo intorno al mondo (First voyage Around the
World). Pigafetta, like Albo, was a member of the Magellan expedition and an eyewitness of
the events, particularly, of the first Mass.
PRIMARY SOURCE: FRANCISCO ALBO’S LOG
Source: “Diario ó derotero del viage de Magallanes desde el cabo se S. Agustin en el Brazil
hasta el regreso a Espana de la nao Victoria, escrito por Frandsco Albo,” Document no. xxii in
Colleción de viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los Españoles desde fines del
siglo XV, ed. Martin Fernandez de Navarrete (reprinted Buenos Aires 1945,5 Vols.) IV, 191-
225. As cited in Miguel A. Bernard “Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass in the
Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of Southern
Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35.
1. On the 16th of March 1521 as they sailed in a westerly course from Landrones, they saw
land towards the Northwest; but owing to many shallow places they did not approach it.
They found later that its name was Yunagan.
2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island named Suluan,
and there they anchored. There they saw some canoes but these fled at the Spaniards’
approach. This island was at 9 and two-thirds degrees North latitude.
3. Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhabited island of
“Gada” where they took in a supply of wood and water. The sea around that island was
free from shallows. (Albo does not give the latitude of this island, but from Pigafetta’s
testimony, this seems to be the “Acquada” or Homonhon, at 10 degress North latitude).
4. From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island names Seilani that was
inhabited and was known to have gold. (Seilani-or, as Pigafetta calls it, “Ceylon”-was
the island of Leyte.)
5. Sailing southwards along the coast of that large island of Seilani, they turned southwest
to a small island called “Mazava.”That island is also at latitude of 9 and two-thirds
degrees north.
6. The people of that island of Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards planted a
cross upon a mountain-top, and from there they were sown three islands to the west
and southwest, where they were told there was much gold. “They showed us how the
gold was gathered, which came in small pieces like peas and lentils.”
7. From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani. They followed the coast of
Seilani in a northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degress of latitude where they
saw three small islands.

Page 3 of 28
8. From there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and there they saw three islets,
where they dropped anchor for the night. In the morning they sailed southwest some 12
leagues, down to latitude of 10 and one-third degree. There they entered a channel
between two islands, one of which was called “Matan” and the other “Subu.”
9. They sailed down the channel and then turned westward and anchored at the town (la
villa) of Subu where they stayed many days and obtained provisions and entered into a
peace-pact with the local king.
10. The town of Subu was on east-west direction islands of Suluan and Mazava. But
between Mazava and Subu, there were so many shallows that the boats could not go
westward directly but has to go (as they did) in a round-about way.
PRIMARY SOURCE: PIGAFETTA’S TESTIMONY ON THE ROUTE OF MAGELLAN’S

EXPIDITION
Source: Emma Blair and James Alexande Robertsons, The Philippine islands, Vols. 33 and 34
as cited in Miguel A. Bernard, “Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass I n the
Philippines, Vol.III, 1-35.
1. Saturday, 16 March 1521-Magellan’s expedition sighted a “high land” named “Zamal”

which was some 300 leagues westward of Landrones (now Marianas ) Islands.
2. Sunday, March 17-“The following day” after sighting Zamal Island, they landed on
“another island which was uninhabited” and which lay “lay to the right” of the above-
mentioned island of “Zamal.”(To the “right” here would mean on their starboard going
south or southwest.) there they set up two tents for the sick members of the crew and
had a sow killed for them. The name of this island was “Humunu” (Homonhon). This
island was located at 0 degrees North latitude.
3. On that same day (Sunday, March 17), Magellan named the entire archipelago the
“Islands of Saint Lazarus,” the reason being that it was Sunday in the Lenten season
when the Gospel assigned for the Mass and the liturgical Office was the eleventh
chapter of St. John, which tells of the raising of Lazarus from the dead.
4. Monday, March 18- ln the afternoon of their second day on that island, they saw a boat
coming towards them with nine men in it. An exchange of gifts was affected. Magellan
asked for food supplies, and the men went away, promising to bring rice and other
supplies in “four days.”
5. There were two springs of water on that island of Homonhon. Also they saw there some
indications that there was gold in these islands. Consequently Magellan renamed the
island and called it the “Watering Place of Good Omen” (Acquada la di bouni segnialli)
6. Friday, March 22- At noon the natives returned. This time they were in two boats, and
they brought food supplies.
7. Magellan’s expedition stayed eight days at Homonhon: from Sunday, March 17, to the
Monday of the following week, March 25.
8. Monday, March 25- In the afternoon, the expedition weighed anchor and left the island
of Homonhon. In the ecclesiastical calendar, this day (March 25) was the feast-day of
the Incarnation, also called the feast of the Annunciation and therefore “Our Lady’s
Day.” On this day, as they were about to weigh anchor, an accident happened to
Pigafetta: he fell into the water but was rescued. He attributed his narrow escape from
death as grace obtained through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary on her
feast-day.
9. The route taken by the expedition after leaving Homonhon was “toward the west
southwest, between four islands: namely Cenalo, Hiunanghan, Ibusson and Albarien.”
Very probably “Cenalo” is a misspelling in the Italian manuscript for what Pigafetta in his
map calls “Ceilon” and Albo calls “Seilani”: namely the island of Leyte. “Hiunanghan” (a
misspelling of Hinunangan) seemed to Pigafetta to be a separate island, but is actually

Page 4 of 28
on the mainland of Leyte (i.e, “Ceylon”). On the other hand, Hibuson (Pigafetta’s
Ibusson) is an island east of Leyte’s southern tip.
Thus, it is easy to see what Pigafetta meant by sailing “toward the west southwest” past
those islands. They left Homonhon sailing westward towards Leyte, then followed the
Leyte coast southward, passing between the island of Hibuson on their portside and
Hiunangan bay on their starboard, and then continued southward, then turning
westward to “Mazaua.”
10. Thursday, March 28- In the morning of holy Thursday, March 28, they anchored off an
island where the previous night they had seen a light or a bonfire. That island “lies in a
latitude of nine and two-thirds towards the Arctic Pole (i.e., North) and in a longitude of
one hundred and sixty-two degrees from the line of demarcation. It is twenty-five
leagues from the Acquada, and is called Mazaua.”
11. They remained seven days on Mazaua Island.
12. Thursday, April 4- they left Mazaua, bound for Cebu. They were guided thither by the
king of Mazaua who sailed in his own boat. Their route took them past five “islands”
namely: “Ceylon, Bohol, Canighan, Baibai, and Gatighan.”
13. At Gatighan, they sailed westward to the three islands of th Camotes group, namely,
Poro, Pasihan and Ponson. Here the Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of
Mazaua to catch up with them, since the Spanish ships were much faster than the
native balanghai- a thing that excited the admiration of the king of Mazaua.
14. Fom the Camotes Islands they sailed southwards towards “Zubu.”
15. Sunday, April 7- At noon they entered the harbor of “Zubu” (Cebu). It had taken them
three days to negotiate the journey from Mazaua northwards to the camotes Islands and
then southwards to Cebu.
PRIMARY SOURCE: PIGAFETTA AND SEVEN DAYS IN MAZAUA

Source: Emma Blair and James Alexande Robertsons, The Philippine islands, Vols. 33 and 34
as cited in Miguel A. Bernard, “Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass I n the
Philippines, Vol.III, 1-35.
1. Thursday, March 28- In the morning they anchored near an island where they had seen
a light the night before a small boat (boloto) came with eight natives, to whom Magellan
threw some trinkets as presents. The natives paddled away, but two hours later two
larger boats (balanghai) came, in one of which the native king sat under an awning of
mats. At Magellan’s invitation some of the natives went up the Spanish ship, but the
native king remained seated in his boat. An exchange of gifts was effected. In the
afternoon that day, the Spanish ships weighed anchor and came closer to shore,
anchoring near the native king’s village. This Thursday, March 28, was Thursday in Holy
Week, i.e., Holy Thursday.
2. Friday, March 29- “Next day. Holy Friday,” Magellan sent his slave interpreter ashore in
a small boat to ask the king if he could provide the expedition with food supplies, and to
say that they had come as friends and not as enemies. In reply the king himself came in
a boat with six or eight men, and this time went up Magellan’s ship and the two men
embraced. Another exchange of gifts was made. The native king and his companions
returned ashore, bringing with them two members of Magellan’s expedition as guests
for the night. One of the twi was Pigafetta.
3. Saturday, March 30- Pigafetta and his companion had spent the previous evening
feasting and drinking with the native king and his son. Pigafetta deplored the fact that,
although it was Good Friday, they had to eat meat. The following morning (Saturday)
Pigafetta and his companion took leave of their hosts and returned to the ships.
4. Sunday, March 31- “Early in the morning of Sunday, the last of March and Easter day,”
Magellan sent the priest ashore with some men to prepare for the Mass. Later in the

Page 5 of 28
morning Magellan landed with some fifty men and Mass was celebrated, after which a
cross was venerated. Magellan and the Spaniards returned to the ship for the noon-dy
meal, but in the afternoon they returned ashore to plant the cross on the summit of the
highest hill. In attendance boh at the Mass and at the planting of the cross were the king
of Mazaua and the king Butuan.
5. Sunday, March 31- On that same afternoon, while on the summit of the highest hill,
Magellan asked the two kings which ports he should go to in order to obtain more
abundant supplies of food than were available in that island. They replied that there
were three ports to choose from: Ceylon, Zubu, and Calagan. Of the three, Zubu was
the port with the most trade. Magellan then said that he wished to go to Zubu and to
depart the following morning. He asked for someone to guide him thither. The kings
replied that the pilots would be available “any time.” But later that evening the King of
Mazaua changed his mind and said that he would himself conduct Magellan to Zubu but
that he would first have to bring the harvest in. He asked Magellan to send him men to
help with the harvest.
6. Monday, April 1- Magellan sent men ashore to help with the harvest, but no work was
done that day because the two kings were sleeping off their drinking bout the night
before.
7. Tuesday, April 2 and Wednesday, April 3- Work on the harvest during the “next to days,”
i.e., Tuesday and Wednesday, the 2nd and 3rd of April.
8. Thursday, April 4- They leave Mazaua, bound for Cebu.
Using the primary sources available, Jesuit priest Miguel A. Bernard in his work Butuan or
Limasawa: The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence (1981)
lays down the argument that in Pigafetta account, a crucial aspect of Butuan was not
mentioned-the river. Butuan is a riverine settlement, situated on the Agusan River. The beach
of Masao is in the delta of said river. It is curious omission in the account of the river, which
makes part of a distinct characteristic of Butuans’ geography that seemed to be too important
to be missed.

Page 6 of 28
ACTIVITY #5
Direction: Read and understand this module. Provide what is being asked. Write your answer
in a long bond paper (Hand written) and attach to the last page of this module.
Instruction:
Examine and combine the two primary sources (Pigafetta and Albo) during the travel of
Ferdinand Magellan to the Philippines using Timeline. Use the Timeline sample below as your
guide.
End of seventh week

Page 7 of 28
-------------------------------------Nothing Follows--------------------------------------

Page 8 of 28

___________________________________________________
LEARNING MODULE
FOR
_____________________________________________________
WEEK 8

Page 9 of 28
WEEK 8
DID RIZAL RETRACT?
Jose Rizal
 Identified as a hero of the revolution for

his writings that center on ending
colonialism and liberating Filipino minds
to contribute to creating the Filipino
nation.
 The great volume of Rizal’s lifework was
committed to this end, particularly the
more influential ones, Noli Me Tangere
and El Filibusterismo.
 His essays vilify not the Catholic religion,
but the friar’s, the main of injustice in the
Philippine society.
Case study 2: Did Rizal Retract?
 It is understandable; therefore, that any piece of writing from Rizal that recants
everything he wrote against the friars and the Catholic Church in the Philippines could
deal heavy damage to his image as a prominent Filipino revolutionary.
 Such document purportedly exists, allegedly signed by Rizal a few hours before his
execution. This document, referred to as “The Retraction”, declares Rizal’s belief in the
Catholic faith, and retracts everything he wrote against church.
Primary Source: Rizal’s Retraction
Source: Translated from the document found by Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M. on 18 May 1935
‘’I declare myself a catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and educated I wish to live
and die.
I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been
contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she
teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is
of the Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate may, as the
Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order
to repair the scandal which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon
me’’.
Manila 29 of December of 1896
Jose Rizal
o There are four iterations of the texts of this retraction:
1. The first was published in La Voz Española and Dario de Manila on the day of the
execution, 30 December 1896.
2. The second text appeared in Barcelona, Spain, in the magazine La Juventud, a few
months after the execution, 14 February 1897, from an anonymous writer who was
later on revealed to be Fr. Vicente Balaguer. However, the “original” text was only

Page 10 of 28
found in the archdiocesan archives on 18 May 1935, after almost four decades of
disappearance.
3. The Balaguer Testimony
 Doubts on the retraction document abound, especially because only one

eyewitness account of the writing of the document exists- that of the Jesuit Friar
Fr. Vicente Balaguer.
 According to his testimony, Rizal woke up several times, confessed four times,
attended a Mass, received communion, and prayed the rosary, all of which
seemed out of character. But since it is the only testimony of allegedly a
“primary” account that Rizal ever wrote a retraction document, it has been used
to argue the authenticity of the document.
4. The Testimony of Cuerpo de Vigilancia
 Another eyewitness account surface in 2016, through the research of Professor

Rene R. Escalante. In his research, documents of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia
included a report on the last hours of Rizal, written by Federico Moreno. The
report details the statement of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia to Moreno.
Primary Source: Eyewitness Account of the Last Hours of Rizal
Source: Michael Charleston Chua, Retraction in Jose Rizal: Mga Bagong Dokumento at
Pananaw,”GMA News Online, published 29 December 2016.
Most Illustrious Sir, the agent of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia stationed in Fort Santiago to
report on the events during the [illegible] day in prison of the accused Jose Rizal, informs me
on this date of the following:
At 7:50 yesterday morning, Jose Rizal entered death row accompanied by his counsel,
Señor Taviel de Andrade, and the Jesuit priest Vilaclara. At the urgings of the former and
moments after entering, he was served a light breakfast. At approximately 9, the Assistant of
the Plaza, Señor Maure, asked Rizal if he wanted anything. He replied that at the moment he
only wanted a prayer book, which was brought to him shortly by Father March.
Señor Andrade left death row at 10 and Rizal spoke for long while with the Jesuit fathers,
March and Vilaclara, regarding religious matters, it seems. It appears that these two
represented him with a prepared retraction on his life and deeds that he refused to sign. They
argued about the matter until 2:30 when Rizal ate some poached egg and a little chicken.
Afterwards he asked to leave to write and wrote for a long time by himself.
At 3 in the afternoon, Father March entered the chapel and Rizal handed him what he had
written. Immediately the chief of the firing squad, Señor del Fresno and the Assistant of the
Plaza, Señor Maure, were informed. They entered death row and together with Rizal signed
the document that the accused had written.
At 5 this morning of the 30 th, the lover of Rizal arrived at the prison… dresses in mourning.
Only the former entered the chapel, followed by a military chaplain whose name I cannot
ascertain. Donning his formal clothes and aided by a soldier of the artillery, the nuptials of Rizal
and the woman who had been his lover were performed at the point of death (in articulo
mortis). After embracing him she left, flooded with tears.
This account corroborates the existence of the retraction documents, giving it credence.
However, nowhere in the account was Fr. Balaguer mentioned, which makes the friar a mere
secondary source to the writing of the document. The retraction of Rizal remainsto this day, a
controversy; many scholars, however, agree that the document does not tarnish the heroism of
Rizal. His relevance remained solidified to Filipinos and pushed them to continue the

Page 11 of 28
revolution, which eventually resulted in independence in 1898.
ACTIVITY #6
Discussion Points and Exercise Questions
General Direction: Provide what is being asked. Use the Rubric below as your guide. Write
your answer in a long bond paper (Hand written) and attach to the last page of this module.
TASKS:
1. Did Rizal retract? Yes or No? Prove your answer with evidences based on the
given primary sources.
2. What values of Rizal did you realize? Then why did you say so?
3. How can you show appreciation on Rizal’s works for our country against
colonizers?
20 Point Rubrics
Level Description
Outstanding Well written and very organized. Excellent grammar mechanics. Clear and
concise statements. Excellent effort and presentation with detail. Demonstrates
a thorough understanding of the topics.
Value: 18-20
Level Description
Good Writes fairly clear. Good grammar mechanics. Good presentation and
organization.
Sufficient effort and detail.
Value: 15-17
Level Description
Fair Minimal effort. Good grammar mechanics. Fair presentation. Few supporting
details.
Value: 10-14
Level: Description
Poor Somewhat unclear. Shows little effort. Poor grammar mechanics. Confusing and
incomplete sentences. No organization of thoughts.
Value: 5-9
Level: Description
Very Poor Lacking effort. Very poor grammar mechanic. Very unclear. Doesn’t address
topic. Limited attempt.
Value: 1-5
End of eight week

--------------------------------------Nothing Follows--------------------------------------

Page 12 of 28

___________________________________________________
LEARNING MODULE
FOR
_____________________________________________________
WEEK 9

Page 13 of 28
WEEK 9
CASE STUDY 3: WHERE DID THE CRY OF REBELLION HAPPEN?
DEFINITION OF THE CRY
 The word “cry” comes from the Spanish el grito de rebelion (cry of rebellion) or el grito
for short. Thus the Grito de Balintawak is similar to the Grito de Dolores of Mexico
(1810). But the “el grito de rebelion” strictly refers to a decision or call to revolt. It
doesn’t necessarily mean shouting, unlike the Filipino term Sigaw or Sigao.
 Originally the term “cry” referred to the first clash between the members of Katipunan
and the Civil Guards (Guardia Civil).
 The cry could also refer to the tearing up of cedulas (community tax certificates) in
resistance to Spanish government.
 The cry can also be referred to in the inscriptions of “Viva la Independencia Filipina”
which was literally accompanied by patriotic shouts.
Cry of Rebellion
 Momentous events swept the Spanish colonies in the late nineteenth century,
including the Philippines.
 Journalist of the time referred to the phrase “El Grito de Rebellion” or “Cry of
Rebellion” to mark the start of these revolutionary events, identifying the places
where it happened.
 In the Philippines, this happened in August 1896, northeast of Manila, where they
declared rebellion against the Spanish colonial government.
 These events are important markers in the history of colonies that struggled for their
independence against their colonizers.
 The controversy regarding this event stems from the identification of the date and
place where the Cry happened. Prominent Filipino historian Teodoro Agoncillo
emphasizes the event when Bonifacio tore the cedula or tax receipt before the
Katipunerios who also did the same.
 Some writers identified the first military event with the Spaniards as the moment of
the Cry, for which, Emilio Aguinaldo commissioned a “Himno de Balintawak” to
inspire the renewed struggle after the Pact of the Biak-na-Bato failed.
 A monument to the Heroes of 1896
was erected in what is now the
intersection of Epifanio de los Santos
Avenue (EDSA) and Andres
Bonifacio Drive-North Diversion
Road, and from then on until 1962,
the Cry of Balintawak was chosen for
an unknown reason.
Cedula or Tax Receipt

(Cedula of a Katipunero torn in half)

Page 14 of 28
The Cry of Biak-na-Bato
The Pact of Biak-na-Bato Signing
The Cry of Pugad Lawin
DIFFERENT DATES AND PLACES OF THE CRY
Various accounts of the Cry give different dates and places.
 A guardi civil, Lt. Olegario Diaz, identified the Cry to have happened in Balintawak on 25
August 1896.
 Teodoro Kalaw, Filipino historian, marks the place to be in Kangkong, Balintawak, on
the last week of August 1896.
 Santiago Alvarez, a Katipunero and son of Mariano Alvarez, leader of the Magdiwang
faction in Cavite, put the Cry in Bahay Toro in Quezon City on 24 August 1896.
 Pio Valenzuela, known Katipunero and privy too many events concerning the Katipunan
stated that the Cry happened in Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896.
 Historian Gregorio Zaide identified the Cry to have happened in Balintawak on 26
August 1896.

Page 15 of 28
 Teodoro Agoncillo put it at Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896, according to statements by
Pio Valenzuela.
 Research by historian claimed that the event took place in Tandang Sora’s barn in
Gulod, Barangay Banlat, Quezon City, on 21 August 1896.
EVENTS PRIOR TO THE CRY OF PUGAD LAWIN

 Several events occurred to strengthen the unity of the Filipino people and brought a
“thirst” for independence.
 These include the Cavite Mutiny of 1872, Martyrdom of the GOMBURZA, propaganda
movements, and different peaceful campaigns for reforms, Dr. Rizal’s exile in Dapitan,
and the foundation and the discovery of the KKK or Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang
Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (“Supreme and Venerable Association of the Children
of the Nation”).
THE KATIPUNAN
 The Katipunan was an offshoot from the La Liga Filipina, a movement that sought to
bring about political reform in the Spanish colonial government led by José Rizal
(Philippines’ national hero).
 Rizal had been exiled right after his organization was formed with their first meeting.
 After several years had passed with essentially no changes in the constitution, Bonifacio
and others lost all hope for some peaceful reform being brought about by La Liga
Filipina.
 Spearheaded by Andres Bonifacio, they abandoned the organization and concentrated
their efforts on the Katipunan to bring about a revolution with the use of violence and
arms.
 Founded by Bonifacio, Ladislaw Diwa, Deodato Arellano, and others on July 7, 1892,
the secret organization consisted of both male and female patrons, including Bonifacio’s
wife, who led the female faction.
 With aiming the organization’s goal of independence from Spain, the Katipunan led by
Andres Bonifacio started the revolution preceded by the Cry of Pugad Lawin.
 August 19, 1896, the paraphernalia used in printing Katipunan documents and other
items was found revealing the existence of the Katipunan.
 Consequently, a series of arrests of Katipuneros in Manila followed, and many Filipinos
were jailed or imprisoned.
 As many as five hundred arrests were performed and many escaped the city for fear of
been captured, tortured, or killed.
TEARING OF CEDULA
 Not all statements describe the tearing of cédulas in the last days of August but the
version of Agoncillo, which was based on the later statements of Pío Valenzuela
including the others who insisted that the cry happened in Pugad Lawin instead of
Balintawak, was the source of the current stance of the Philippine government official
commemorations.
 Bonifacio and many others had escaped to Pugad Lawin.
 During their meeting at the house of Juan Ramos on August 23, 1896, Bonifacio urged
his supporters to tear into pieces their cédulas (residence certificates) as a sign of revolt
against the Spanish government.
 Being highly motivated by the killings and arrest of their fellow members in Manila, they
tore up their cedulas and let out the cry “Long live the Philippines,” which is known as
the Cry of Pugad Lawin in Philippine history.
 He released a manifesto on the 28th for all their supporters in the surrounding towns to
take up arms on the impending strike on Manila which would happen on August 29th.
 The revolt eventually increased in strength and spread to eight provinces –Manila,
Bulacan, Cavite, Pampanga, Tarlac, Laguna, Batangas, and Nueva Ecija — which were
subsequently represented by the eight rays of the sun in the present Filipino flag.

Page 16 of 28
DEATH AND LEGACY
 The Cry of the Rebellion in Pugad Lawin marked the beginning of the Philippine
Revolution in 1896 which ultimately led to Philippine Independence in 1898.
 After Bonifacio’s death on May 10, 1897, in Maragondon, Cavite, and General Emilio
Aguinaldo continued the revolution.
 He declared the independence of the country from Spain on June 12, 1898, at Kawit,
Cavite.
ACTIVITY 7
Direction: Provide what is being asked. Use the Rubric below as your guide. Write your
answer in a long bond paper (Hand written) and attach to the last page of this module.
TASKS:
1. Research and compare briefly the use of cedula during the Spanish colonial rule in the
Philippines to its current purpose.
Purpose of cedula Today’s purpose of

during Spanish cedula
colonial rule
2. What do you think the significance of tearing of the cedula?
Rubric:
Level Description
Outstanding Student uses 3 or more sentences in their own words to describe clearly what
the main points are about.
Value: 45-50
Level Description
Good Student uses 3 or less sentences to describe the main points, but not all is in
their own words.
Value: 35-44
Level Description
Fair Student summarizes most of the main points accurately, but has some
misunderstanding and may need to reread or seek tutoring for understanding.
Value: 28-34
Level: Description
Poor Student has difficulty summarizing the main points and needs to see the teacher.
Value: 20-27

Page 17 of 28
End of ninth week
--------------------------------------Nothing Follows--------------------------------------


___________________________________________________
LEARNING MODULE
FOR
_____________________________________________________
WEEK 10

Page 18 of 28
WEEK 10
EVOLUTION OF THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION
The constitution is defined as a set of fundamental principles or established precedent

according to which a state or other organization I governed, thus, the word itself means to be a
part of a whole, the coming together of distinct entities into one group, with the same
principles and ideals. These principles define the nature and extent of government.
The Constitution of the Philippines, the supreme law of the Republic of the Philippines, has
been in effect since 1987. There were only three other constitutions that have effectively
governed the country: the 1935 Commonwealth Constitution, the 1973 Constitution, and the
1986 Freedom Constitution. However, there was earlier constitution attempted by Filipinos in
the struggle to break free from the colonial yoke.
1897: Constitution of Biak-na-Bato
The Constitution of Biak-na-Bato was the provisionary Constitution of the Philippine

Republic during the Philippine Revolution, and was promulgated by the Philippine
Revolutionary Government on 1 November 1897. The constitution, borrowed from Cuba, was
written by Isabelo Artacho and Felix Ferrer in Spanish, on translated into Tagalog.
The organs of the government under the Constitution were:(1) the Supreme Council, which
was vested with the power of the Republic, headed by the president and four department
secretaries: the interior, foreign affairs, treasury, and war; (2) the Consejo Supremo de Gracia
Y Justicia (Supreme Council of Grace and Justice), which was given the authority to make
decisions and affirm or disprove the sentences rendered by other courts and to dictate rules
for the administration of justice; and (3) the Asamblea de Representantes ( Assembly of
Representatives), which was to be convened after the revolution to create a new Constitution
and to elect a new Council of Government and Representatives of the people.
The Constitution of Biak-na Bato was never fully implemented, since a truce, the Pact of
Biak-na-Bato, was signed between the Spanish and the Philippine Revolutionary Army.
Primary Source: Preamble of the Biak-na-Bato Constitution
The separation of the Philippines from the Spanish monarchy and their formation into an
independent state with its own government called the Philippine Republic has been the end
sought by the Revolution in the existing war, begun on the 24 th of August, 1896; and, therefore,
in its name and by the power delegated by the Filipino people, interpreting faithfullyr their
desires and ambitions, we the representatives of the Revolution, in a meeting at Biak-na-Bato,
November 1, 1897, unanimously adopted the following articles for the constitutions of the
State.
1899: Malolos Constitution
After the signing of the truce, the Filipino revolutionary leaders accepted a payment from
Spain and went to exile in Hong Kong. Upon the defeat of the Spanish to the Americans in the
Battle of Manila Bay on 1 May 1898, the United States Navy transported Aguinaldo back to the

Page 19 of 28
Philippines. The newly reformed Philippine revolutionary forces reverted to the control of
Aguinaldo, and the Philippine Declaration of Independence was issued on 12 June 1898,
together with several decrees that formed the First Philippine Republic. The Malolos Congress
was elected, which selected a commission to draw up a draft constitution on 17 September
1898, which was composed of wealthy and educated men.
The document they came up with, approved by the Congress on 29 November 1898, and
promulgated by Aguinaldo on 21 January 1899, was titled "The Political Constitution of 1899"
and written in Spanish. The constitution has 39 articles divided into 14 titles, with eight articles
of transitory provisions, and a final additional article. The document was patterned after the
Spanish Constitution of 1812, with influences from the charters of Belgium, Mexico, Brazil,
Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Guatemala, and the French Constitution of 1973. According to
Felipe Calderon, main author of the constitution, these countries were studied because they
shared similar social, political, ethnological, and governance conditions with the Philippines.
Prior constitutional projects in the Philippines also influenced the Malolos Constitution, namely,
the Kartilya and the Sangguniang-Hukuman, the charter of laws and morals of the Katipunan
written by Emilio Jacinto in 1896; the Biak-na-Bato Constitution of 1897 planned by Isabelo
Artacho; Mabini’s Constitutional Program of the Philippines Republic of 1898; the provisional
constitutions; and the autonomy projects of Paterno in 1898.
Primary Source: Preamble of the Political Constitution of 1899
We, the Representatives of the Filipino People, lawfully convened, in order to establish
justice, provide for common defense, promote the general welfare and insure the benefits of
liberty, imploring the aid of the Sovereign Legislator of the Universe for the attainment of these
ends, have voted, decreed, and sanctioned the following political constitution.
As a direct challenge to colonial authorities of the Spanish empire, the sovereignty was
retroverted to the people, a legal principle underlying the Philippine Revolution. The people
delegated governmental functions to civil servants while they retained actual sovereignty. The
27 articles of Title IV detail the natural rights and popular sovereignty of Filipinos, the
enumeration of which does not imply the prohibition of any other rights not expressly stated.
Title III, Article V also declares that the State recognizes the freedom and equality of all beliefs,
as well as the separation of Church and State. These are direct reactions to features of the
Spanish government in the Philippines, where the friars were dominant agents of the State.
The form of government, according to Title II, Article 4 is to be popular, representative,

alternative, and responsible, and shall exercise three distinct power-legislative, executive, and
judicial. The legislative power was vested in a unicameral body called the Assembly of
Representatives, members of which are elected for terms of four years. Secretaries of the
government were given seats in the assembly, which meet annually for a period of at least
three months. Bills could be introduced either by the president or by a member of the
assembly. Some powers not legislative in nature were also and interpretation, and the right of
impeaching the president, cabinet members, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, and the
solicitor-general. A permanent commission of seven, elected by the assembly, and granted
specific powers by the constitutions, was to sit during the intervals between sessions of the
assembly.
Execute power was vested in the president, and elected by a constituent assembly of the
Assembly of Representatives and special representatives. The president will serve a term of
four years without re-election. There was no vice president, and in case of a vacancy, a
president was to be selected by the constituent assembly.
The 1899 Malolos Constitution was never enforced due to the ongoing war. The
Philippines was effectively a territory of the United States upon the signing of the Treaty of
Paris between Spain and the United States, transferring sovereignty of the Philippines on 10
December 1898.

Page 20 of 28
1935: The Commonwealth Constitution
It is worth mentioning that after the Treaty of Paris, the Philippines was subject to the
power of the United States of America, effectively the new colonizers of the country. From 1898
to 1901, the Philippines would be placed under a military government until a civil government
would be put into place.
Two acts of the United States Congress were passed that may be considered to have
qualities of constitutionality. First was the Philippine Organic Act of 1902, the first organic law
for the Philippine Islands that provided for the creation of a popularly elected Philippine
Assembly. The act specified that legislative power would be vested in a bicameral legislature
composed of the Philippine Commission as the upper house and the Philippine Assembly as
lower house. Key provisions of the act included a bill of rights for Filipinos and the
appointments of two non-voting Filipino Resident Commissioners of the Philippines are
representative to the United States House of Representatives. The second act that functioned
as a constitution was the Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916, commonly referred to as “Jones
Law”, which modified the structure of the Philippine government through the removal of the
Philippine Commission, replacing it with a Senate that served as the upper house and its
members elected by the Filipino voters, the first truly elected national legislature. It was also
this Act that explicitly declared the purpose of the United States to end their sovereignty over
the Philippines and recognize Philippine independence as soon as a stable government can be
established.
In 1932, with the efforts of the Filipino independence mission led by Sergio Osmeña and
Manuel Roxas, the United States Congress passed the Hare-Hawess-Cutting Act with the
promise of granting Filipinos’ independence. The bill was opposed by then Senate President
Manuel L. Quezon and consequently, rejected by the Philippine Senate.
By 1934, another law, the Tydings-McDuffie Act, also known as the Philippine
Independence Act, was passed by the United States Congress that provided authority and
defined mechanisms for the establishment of a formal constitution by a constitutional
convention. The members of the convention were elected and held their first meeting on 30
July 1934, with Claro m. Recto unanimously elected as president.
The constitution was crafted to meet the approval of the United States government, and to
ensure that the United States would live up to its promise to grant independence to the
Philippines.
Primary Source: Preamble of the 1935 Commonwealth
The Filipino people, imploring the aid of Divine Providence, in order to establish a government
that shall embody their ideals, conserve and develop the patrimony of the nation, promote the
general welfare, and secure to themselves and their posterity the blessings of independence
under a regime of justice, liberty, and democracy, do ordain and promulgate this constitution.
The constitution created the Commonwealth of the Philippines, an administrative body that
governed the Philippines from 1935 to 1946. It is a transitional administration to prepare the
country toward its full achievement of independence. It originality provided for a unicameral
National Assembly with a president and vice president elected to six-year term without re-
election. It was amended in 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate and a
House of Representatives, as well as the creation of an independent electoral commission,
and limited the term of office of the president and vice president to four years, with one re-
election. Rights to suffrage were originally afforded to male citizens of the Philippines who are
twenty-one years of age or over and are able to read and write; this was later on extended to
women within two years after the adoption of the constitution.

Page 21 of 28
While the dominant influence in the constitution was American, it also bears traces of the
Malolos Constitution, the German, Spanish, and Mexican constitutions, constitution of several
South American countries, and the unwritten English Constitution.
The draft of the constitution was approved by the constitutional convention on 8 February
1935, and ratified by then U.S President Franklin B. Roosevelt on 25 March 1935. Elections
were held in September 1935 and Manuel L. Quezon was elected President of the
Commonwealth.
The Commonwealth was briefly interrupted by the events of the World War II, with
Japanese occupying the Philippines. Afterward, upon liberation, the Philippines was declared
an independent republic on 4 July 1946.
ACTIVITY 8
Direction: Read and understand this module. Provide what is being asked. Use the Rubric
below as your guide. Write your answer in a long bond paper (Hand written) and attach to the
last page of this module.
TASK:
1. Compare and contrast the given events using venn diagram
20 points rubric
Level Description
Outstanding Well written and very organized. Excellent grammar mechanics. Clear and
concise statements. Excellent effort and presentation with detail. Demonstrates
a thorough understanding of the topics.
Value: 18-20
Level Description
Good Writes fairly clear. Good grammar mechanics. Good presentation and
organization.
Sufficient effort and detail.
Value: 15-17
Level Description
Fair Minimal effort. Good grammar mechanics. Fair presentation. Few supporting
details.
Value: 10-14

Page 22 of 28
Level: Description
Poor Somewhat unclear. Shows little effort. Poor grammar mechanics. Confusing and
incomplete sentences. No organization of thoughts.
Value: 5-9
Level: Description
Very Poor Lacking effort. Very poor grammar mechanic. Very unclear. Doesn’t address
topic. Limited attempt.
Value: 1-5
End of tenth week

-------------------------------------Nothing Follows--------------------------------------


___________________________________________________
LEARNING MODULE
FOR
_____________________________________________________

Page 23 of 28
WEEK 11
WEEK 11
1973: Constitutional Authoritarianism
In 1965, Ferdinand E. Marcos was elected president, and in 1967, Philippine Congress
passed a resolution calling for a constitutional convention to change the 1935 Constitutional.
Marcos won the re- election in 1969, in a bid boosted by campaign overspending and use of
government funds. Elections of the delegates to the constitutional convention were held on 20
November 1970, and the convention began formally on 1 June 1971, with former President
Carlos P. Garcia elected as convention president. Unfortunately, he died, and was succeeded
by another former president, Diosdado Macapagal.
Before the convention finished its work, Martial Law was declared. Marcos cited a growing
communist insurgency as reason for the Martial Law, which was provided for in the 1935
Constitution. Some delegates of the ongoing constitutional convention were placed behind
bars and others went into hiding or were voluntary exiled. With Marcos as dictator, the direction
for the convention turned, with accounts that the president himself dictated some provisions of
the constitution, manipulating the document to be able to hold on to power for as long as he
could. On 29 November 1972, the convention approved its proposed constitution.
The constitution was supposed to introduce a parliamentary-style government, where

legislative power was vested in a unicameral National Assembly, with members being elected
to a six- year term. The president was to be elected as the symbolic and ceremonial head of
state chosen from the members of the National Assembly. The president would serve a six-
year term and could be re- elected to an unlimited number of terms. Executive power was
relegated to the Prime Minister, who was also the head of government and Commander-in-
Chief of the Armed Forces who was also to be elected from the National Assembly.
President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 73 setting the date of the plebiscite to
ratify or reject the proposed constitution on 30 November 1973. This plebiscite was postponed
later on since Marcos feared that the public might vote to reject the constitution. Instead of a
plebiscite, Citizen Assemblies were held, from 10-15 January 1973, where the citizens coming
together and voting by hand, decided on whether to ratify the constitution, suspend the
convening of the Interim National Assembly, continue Martial Law, or place a moratorium on
elections for a period of at least several years. The president, on 17 January 1973, issued a
proclamation announcing that the proposed constitutional had been ratified by an
overwhelming vote of the members of the highly irregular Citizens Assemblies.
The constitution was amended several times. In 1976, Citizen Assemblies, once again,
decided to allow the continuation of Martial Law, as well as approved the amendments: an
Interim Batasang Pambansa to substitute for the Interim National Assembly, the president to

Page 24 of 28
also become the Prime Minister and continue to exercise legislative powers until Martial Law
was lifted and authorized the President to legislate on his own on an emergency basis. An
overwhelming majority would ratify further amendments succeeding. In 1980, the retirement
age of members of the judiciary was extended to 70 years. In 1981, the parliamentary system
was formally modified to a French- style, semi- presidential system where executive power
was restored to the president, who was, once again, to be directly elected; an Executive
Committee was to be created, composed of the Prime Minister and 14 others that served as
the president’s Cabinet; and some electoral reforms were instituted. In 1984, the Executive
Committee was abolished and the position of the vice president was restored.
After all the amendments introduced, the 1973 Constitution was merely a way for the
President to keep executive powers, abolish the Senate, and by any means, never acted as a
parliamentary system, instead functioned as an authoritarian presidential system, with all the
real power concentrated in the hands of the president, with the backing of the constitution.
The situation in the 1980s had been very turbulent. As Marcos amassed power, discontent
has also been burgeoning. The tide turned swiftly when in August1983, Benigno Aquino Jr.,
and opposition leader and regarded as the most credible alternative to President Marcos, was
assassinated while under military escort immediately after his return from exile in the United
States. There was widespread suspicion that the others to assassinate Aquino came from the
top levels of the government and the military. This event caused the coming the coming
together of the non- violent opposition against the Marcos authoritarian regimen. Marcos was
then forced to hold “snap” elections a year early, and said elections were marred by
widespread fraud. Marcos declared him winner despite international condemnation and
nationwide protests. A small group military rebel attempted to stage a coup, but failed;
however, this triggered what came to be known as the EDSA People Power Revolution of
1986, as people from all walks of life spilled onto the streets. Under pressure from the United
States of America, who used to support Marcos and his Martial Law, the Marcos family fled into
exile. His opponent in the snap elections, Benigno Aquino Jr,’ widow, Corazon Aquino, was
installed as president on 25 February 1986.
1987: Constitution After Martial Law
President Corazon Aquino’s government had three options regarding the constitution:
revert to the 1935 Constitution, retain the 1973 Constitution and be granted the power to make
reforms, or start a new and break from the “vestiges of a disgraced dictatorship.” They decide
to make a new constitution that, according to the president herself, should be “truly reflective of
the aspirations and ideals of the Filipino people.”
In March 1986, President Aquino proclaimed a transitional constitution to last for a year
while a Constitutional Commission drafted a permanent constitution. This transitional
constitutions, called the Freedom Constitution, maintained many provisions of the one old,
including in rewritten form the presidential right to rule by decree. In 1986, a constitutional
convention was created, composed of 48 members appointed by the President Aquino from
varied backgrounds and representations. The convention drew up a permanent constitution,
largely restoring the setup abolished by Marcos in 1972, but with new ways to keep the
president in check, a reaction to the experience of Marcos’s rule. The new constitution was
officially adopted on 2 February 1987.
The Constitution begins with preamble and eighteen self-contained articles. It established
the Philippines as a “democratic republican State” where “sovereignty resides in the people
and all government authority emanates from them.” It allocates governmental powers among
the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government.
The Executive branch is headed by the president and his cabinet, whom he appoints. The

Page 25 of 28
president is the head of the state and the chief executive, but his power is limited by significant
checks from the two other co-equal branches of government, especially during times of
emergency. This is put in place to safeguard the country from the experience of martial law
despotism during the presidency of Marcos. In case of national emergency, the president may
still declare martial law, but no longer than a period of sixty days. Congress, through a majority
vote, can revoke this decision, or extend it for a period that they determine. The Supreme
Court may also review the declaration of martial law and decide if there were sufficient
justifying facts for the act. The president and the vice president are elected at large by a direct
vote, serving a single six year term.
The legislative power resides in a Congress divided into two Houses: the Senate and the
House of Representatives. The 24 senators are elected at large by popular vote, and can
serve no more than two consecutive six year terms. The House is composed of district
representatives representing a particular geographic area and makes up around 80% of the
total number of representatives. There are 234 legislative districts in the Philippines that elect
their representatives to serve three-year terms. The 1987 Constitution created a party-list
system to provide sources for the participation of under-represented community sectors or
groups. Party-list representatives may fill up not more than 20% of the seats in the House.
Aside from the exclusive power of legislation, Congress may also declare war, through a
two-thirds vote in both upper and lower houses. The power of legislation, however, is also
subject to an executive check, as the president retains the power to veto or stop a bill from
becoming a law. Congress may only override this power with two-thirds vote in both houses.
The Philippine Court system is vested with the power of the judiciary, and is composed for
a Supreme Court and lower courts as created by law. The Supreme Court is a 15-member
court appointed by the president without the need to be confirmed by Congress. The
appointment the president makes, however, is limited to a list of nominees provided by a
specified Judicial and Bar Council. The Supreme Court Justices may hear, on appeal, any
cases dealing with the constitutionally of any law, treaty, or decree of the government, case
where questions of jurisdiction or judicial error are concerned, or cases where the penalty is
sufficiently grave. It may also exercise original jurisdiction over cases involving government or
international officials. The Supreme Court is also in charge of overseeing the functioning and
administration of the lower courts and their personnel.
The Constitution also established three independent Constitutional Commissions, namely,

the Civil Service Commission, a central agency in charge of government personnel; the
Commission on Elections, mandated to enforce and administer all election laws and
regulations; and the Commission on Audit, which examines all funds, transactions, and
property accounts of the government and its agencies.
To further promote to ethical and lawful conduct of the government, the Office of the
Ombudsman was created to investigate complaints that pertain to public corruption, unlawful
behavior of public officials, and other public misconduct. The Ombudsman can charge public
officials before the Sandigang Bayan, a special court created for this purpose.
Only the House of Representatives can initiate the impeachment of the president,
members of the Supreme Court, and other constitutionally protected public officials such as the
Ombudsman. The Senate will then try the impeachment case. This is another safeguard to
promote moral and ethical conduct in the government.
Attempts to Amend or Change the 1987 Constitution
The 1987 Constitution provided for three methods by which the Constitution can be
amended, all requiring ratification by a majority vote in a national referendum. These methods
were Constituent Assembly, Constitutional Convention, and People’s Initiative. Using these
modes, there were efforts to amend of change the 1987 Constitution, starting with the
presidency of Fidel V. Ramos who succeeded Corazon Aquino. The first attempt was in 1995,

Page 26 of 28
when the Secretary of the National Security Council Jose Almonte drafted a constitution, but it
was exposed to the media and it never prospered. The second effort happened in 1997, when
a group called PIRMA hoped to gather signatures from voters to change the constitution
through a people’s initiative. Many were against this, including then Senator Miriam Defensor-
Santiago, who brought the issue to court and won—with the Supreme Court judging that a
people’s initiative cannot push through without an enabling law.
The succeeding president, Joseph Ejercito Estrada, formed a study commission to

investigate the issues surrounding charter change focusing on the economic and judiciary
provisions of the constitution. This effort was also blocked by different entities. After President
Estrada was replaced by another people Power and succeeded by his Vice President, Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, then House Speaker Jose de Venecia endorsed constitutional change
through a Constituent Assembly, which entails a two-thirds vote of the House to propose
amendments or revision to the Constitution. This initiative was also not successful since the
term of President Arroyo was mired in controversy and scandal, including the possibility of
Arroyo extending her term as president, which the Constitution does not allow.
The administration of the succeeding President Benigno Aquino III had no marked interest
in charter change, except those emanating from different members of Congress, including the
Speaker of the House, Feliciano Belmonte Jr., who attempted to introduce amendments to the
Constitution that concern economic provisions that aim toward liberalization. This effort did not
see the light of day.
In an upsurge of populism, President Rodrigo Duterte won the 2016 presidential elections
in a campaign centering on law and order, proposing to reduce crime by killing tens of
thousands criminals. He is also known advocate of federalism, a compound mode of
government combining a central of federal government with regional governments in a single
political system. This advocacy is in part an influence of his background, being a local leader in
Mindanao that has been mired in poverty and violence for decades. On 7 December 2016,
President Duterte signed an executive order creating a consultative committee to review the
1987 Constitution.

Page 27 of 28
ACTIVITY 9
Direction: Read and understand this module. Provide what is being asked. Use the Rubric
below as your guide. Write your answer in a long bond paper (Hand written) and attach to the
last page of this module.
TASK:
Research Work
Think of a specific social, political, economic, or cultural issue in the Philippines. Research
on its evolution and propose recommendations and solutions.
End of eleventh week

-------------------------------------Nothing Follows--------------------------------------

Page 28 of 28

Ge112 Week 7 11

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ge112 Week 7 11

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, INC.

National Highway, Crossing Rubber, Tupi, South Cotabato

GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

COURSE CODE : GE 112

The following are the topics to be discussed

Instruction to the Learners

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

PRIMARY SOURCE: FRANCISCO ALBO’S LOG

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

PRIMARY SOURCE: PIGAFETTA’S TESTIMONY ON THE ROUTE OF MAGELLAN’S

1. Saturday, 16 March 1521-Magellan’s expedition sighted a “high land” named “Zamal”

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

PRIMARY SOURCE: PIGAFETTA AND SEVEN DAYS IN MAZAUA

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

End of seventh week

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

 Identified as a hero of the revolution for

Case study 2: Did Rizal Retract?

Primary Source: Rizal’s Retraction

o There are four iterations of the texts of this retraction:

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

3. The Balaguer Testimony

 Doubts on the retraction document abound, especially because only one

4. The Testimony of Cuerpo de Vigilancia

 Another eyewitness account surface in 2016, through the research of Professor

Primary Source: Eyewitness Account of the Last Hours of Rizal

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

End of eight week

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

DEFINITION OF THE CRY

Cedula or Tax Receipt

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

The Pact of Biak-na-Bato Signing

The Cry of Pugad Lawin

DIFFERENT DATES AND PLACES OF THE CRY

Various accounts of the Cry give different dates and places.

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

EVENTS PRIOR TO THE CRY OF PUGAD LAWIN

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

Purpose of cedula Today’s purpose of

2. What do you think the significance of tearing of the cedula?

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

SOUTH EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, INC.

GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

The constitution is defined as a set of fundamental principles or established precedent

1897: Constitution of Biak-na-Bato

The Constitution of Biak-na-Bato was the provisionary Constitution of the Philippine

Primary Source: Preamble of the Biak-na-Bato Constitution

1899: Malolos Constitution

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

Primary Source: Preamble of the Political Constitution of 1899

The form of government, according to Title II, Article 4 is to be popular, representative,

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History

Primary Source: Preamble of the 1935 Commonwealth

GE 112: Readings in Philippine History