“To tell the destiny of a nation, it is

necessary to open the book that tells

on her past”
- Rizal,
n.d.
 J.S. Cummins of University of London
Rizal (annotated version of Morga)
Morga’s version was created Garnier Hermanos, Paris – Reprinted Morgan’s copy
1609 1889 1971

1868 1909
H.E.J Stanley, Hakluyt Society,
Wenceslao Retana (most accurate
London (English Translation)– misprints from Morga included)
History
The different concepts of Filipino did not exist until Rizal’s time and Filipino nation did
not exist until the establishment of the Philippine republic under Aguinaldo. Being
irritated by the false claims written by the Spaniards about the pre-colonial Philippines,
Rizal realized the importance of the past as the tool to understand the present. Rizal as
he was writing Philippine history the historiographical importance of this little-read
scholarly work by Rizal is that it was the first historical work on the Philippines by a
Filipino.
He wished to embark on some historical research, but he felt inadequate as what he
told to Ferdinand Blumentritt after he asked Rizal to write a history of the Philippines.
By this time, he began working on a sequel for Noli Me Tangere and had a change of
heart and began to produce a work that will influence his countrymen to think correctly.
Rizal was a realist who accepted the fact that scholarly books would not be financially
rewarding and stated to a letter to Blumentritt that his aim was to present a new
edition to the public, above all the Filipino public and he is doing it solely for his
country, because his work will not bring him either honor or money.
Antonio Morga
 Born in 1559 in Seville, Spain
 Graduated from University of Salamanca (1574),
attained a doctorate in Canon Law (1578)
 In 1580 he joined the government service, appointed
in 1593 as Lieutenant Governor in Manila
 Rose to fame when he became in charge of the
Spanish fleet against Dutch invasion, wherein the
Spaniards lost heavily. As a way of saving face after
the disaster with the Dutch invaders in Manila in 1600,
Morga created the version of Battle of Manila which
consists of eight (8) chapters:
1. Of the first discoveries of the Eastern Islands
2. Of the government of Dr. Francisco de Sande
3. Of the government of don Gonzalo Ronquillo de
Peñalosa
4. Of the government of Dr. Santiago de Vera
5. Of the government of Gomez Perez Dasmariñas
6. Of the government of don Francisco Tello
7. Of the government of don Pedro de Acuña
8. An account of the Philippine Islands
Reasons why religious literature was not
considered and Morga’s work was preferred by
Rizal:
*religious testimonials by Chinese was done after
they have been converted into Catholics.
*Morgan’s was used to discredit Aduarte’s work.
*Jesuits were spared to tirades, but 50 years behind
secular opinions and science.
Rizal’s choice of Morga
1. Morga was a layman, not a religious chronicler.
2. Only civil history of the Philippines.
3. The secular act was more objective more
trustworthy than religious missionaries.
4. Morga appears to be more sympathetic/against
friars who are more racist.
5. Morga was an eyewitness to the situation in the
country.
Rizal stated in his annotation that Filipinos had own
culture before 1521, thus Filipinos are not saved from
barbarism by the Spaniards. Flourishing civilization
could have developed into something if not obliterated
by the friars.

*A Visayan couple of the

nobility caste, dressed in
embroidered silk and with
various gold jewellery,
depicted in the 16th-
century 
Notable statements/annotations
by Rizal:
Filipinos before the Spaniards had the
idea of:
 Metallurgy – based on Panday Pira – a well-known ironsmith on
the region. Rizal based the idea of metallurgy existing on the
islands of our country because of Panday Pira and his skills on
being an ironsmith. He stated that no Spaniards nor his (Panday
Pira) kids know what he can do or replicate the things he did after
he died. This was proven wrong by a letter of Vera asking help to
the Viceroy wherein he said that no natives can be skilled enough
to do big cannons. Leading to the request of cannons came from
Spanish ships or made by Robles. (a Spanish master founder) This
was stated in Retana’s version.
*A typical forge of iron
workers in northern Luzon
highlands (From the book
the tinguian social, religious,
and economic life of a
philippine tribe by fay-
cooper cole, 1922).
 Ship-building industry – Rizal exaggerated that natives could build
ships that could hold around 2000 tons but later came to extinction
due to cutting down of trees by the Spaniards.
*A Karakowa ancient Battles
hips with Lantaka Cannons.
 Literature – Rizal blamed Spaniards for the loss of pre-Hispanic
Philippine literature. (which may or may not fully exist)
- In Retana’s version of the book (Morga), he cited documents
that task historians from claiming so much from so little (Rizal)
- Retana stated that Rizal misread the article of Blumentritt
wherein he stated that Portuguese taught Tagalogs the foundry
of cannons brought by Portuguese adventurers and deserters.
Rizal’s annotations were criticized by Blumentritt,
whom he asked to do a introduction to the book itself.
On his introduction, he noticed that Rizal’s annotations
were:
 Not new to the historians, especially the
Germans who had discussed the same.
 Ahistorical use of hindsight & use of strong
anti-clerical bias – censure of past events and
statements against the catholic church. Rizal used
history as a propaganda weapon against the
abuses of colonial Spaniards.
The critique made by Blumentritt has affected his friendship with
Rizal, but one must remember that Rizal was the one solicited the
introduction. On the print version was a slightly edited version of the
introduction made by Rizal.
Rizal n
d De los
aReyes
Isabelo de los Reyes
 a journalist, businessman, labor leader, politician
and a prominent member of Iglesia Filipina
Independiente (Philippine Independent Church).
 Also interested in aspects of Philippine History and
Culture
 Has published many books, pamphlets and
articles
- de los Reyes called out Rizal in his Historia de
Ilocos, comparing Rizal’s annotations to his own
research, in which he described as “excessive
patriotism”
- de los Reyes called out Rizal in his Historia de Ilocos, comparing
Rizal’s annotations to his own research, in which he described as
“excessive patriotism”
- Rizal responded in La Solidaridad and expressed his feelings by
using sarcasm and attacked de los Reyes fondness of using
Philippine terms/Ilocano in his work. He continued his statement by
flaunting his familiarity of primary sources in Philippine History. He
even cites seven authors (Pigafetta, Chirino, Morga, Argensola,
Colin, San Agustin and Aduarte) against the one main source of de
los Reyes.
- Juan Luna wrote to Rizal’s that disagreements between
propagandists was counter-productive and it’s giving the Spaniards
a “great laugh”
- Rizal’s patriotism made him over-sensitive or intolerant of
criticism. He wanted to project the ideal image of an indio. His own
racist conception of history compared to that of the Spaniards.
- de los Reyes’ scholarship was more objective – fair as told by
Tavera. She did not falsify history to glorify ancient (pre-Hispanic)
civilization of the Filipinos. Rizal expressed committed scholarship –
References:

• Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History

Author(s): Ambeth R. Ocampo Source: Philippine
Studies, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Second Quarter 1998), pp.
184-214 Published by: Ateneo de Manila University

• Tracing Origins: "Ilustrado" Nationalism and the

Racial Science of Migration Waves Author(s):
Filomeno V. Aguilar, Jr. Reviewed work(s): Source: The
Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 64, No. 3 (Aug., 2005),
pp. 605-637
GROUP
MEMBERS:
CERVO, ELLA MAE G.

ESPIRITU, AARON

PALOMA, JAIRON