History PDF

History is the search for knowledge and truth, a discipline that studies the chronological order of events and is seen as the study or record of past events. To better understand history, it is essential to determine its very nature. 1. History is a study of the present in the light of the past. The...

History is the search for knowledge and truth, a discipline that studies the chronological order of events and is seen as the study or record of past events. To better understand history, it is essential to determine its very nature. 1. History is a study of the present in the light of the past. The present owes its existence to the past. To understand how society has come to its present form, there is a need to know its past. One cannot just leapfrog and ignore what happened in the past. The past events need to be unearthed to reveal how the present evolved out of it. 2. History is the study of man. As one historian said, history deals with man's struggles through the ages. Past events are riddled with man's engagement in wars, his struggles to win his independence. History traces the fascinating story of how man has developed through the ages, how man has studied to use and control his environment and how the present institutions have grown out of the past. 3. History is concerned with man in time. It deals with a series of events and each event happens at a given point in time. History dwells on human development in time. 4. History is concerned with man in space. History talks about nations and human activities in the context of their physical and geographical environment. It centers on the interaction of man in his environment and vice-versa. 5. History provides an objective record of happenings. Historians are careful on the data they include in their books. They base their data on original sources and make them free from subjective interpretation. 6. History is multi sided. History is not limited to one certain aspect of man's life, it covers all other aspects as they are all closely interrelated. A change in politics could have an effect in other aspects of society. 7. History is a dialogue between the events of the past and progressively emerging future ends. Past events are interpreted and become predictors of new objectives. 8. History is not only narration but it is also an analysis. History is not confined to narrative accounts. It dissects and explains the occurrence of the event and how it ultimately changes the society over time. 9. Continuity and coherence are the necessary requisites of history. History monitors the development of the society, from generation to generation, after a series of events, justifying the essence of continuity. 10. History is relevant. In the study of history, only significant events which have influenced society are covered and essential to the understanding of the present life. 11. History is comprehensive. History is not limited to one period or to one country alone. It deals with all aspects of human life-political, social, economic, religious, literary, aesthetic, and physical, giving a clear picture of global linkage. RELEVANCE OF HISTORY Truly, history is relevant to mankind. It is very useful not only to the students but also to every individual from different walks of life, as it serves as a powerful tool for understanding the complexities of our shared human experience and provides invaluable insights into the challenges and triumphs that have shaped our present reality. 1. History helps us understand people and societies. Understanding the culture of a particular race is difficult without looking back at its history. Experiences in the past play in shaping the society, Countless revolution, alliances, and elections influence how people act and behave. Studying history will allow us to figure out why the Puritans left England in the 14th century, why the Jews hated Adolf Hitler that much, and how the Palestines struggle for recognition until now. 2. History contributes to moral understanding. Studying the struggles of heroes in the past or of people who defied adversities can serve as inspiration. A study of the past can provide lessons in courage, diligence or constructive protest. Mahatma Gandhi and Corazon Aquino set good examples of peaceful revolution. 3. History provides identity. Historical data include evidence about how families, race, institutions and countries were formed and how they evolved while retaining cohesion. History provides facts about genealogy and a basis for understanding how the family has interacted with larger historical change. 4. Studying history is essential for good citizenship. Knowing where your ancestors came from and their struggles for freedom is a source of pride for any individual. History provides data about the emergence of national institutions, problems and values. It offers evidence also about how nations have interacted with other societies, providing international and comparative perspectives essential for responsible citizenship. Studying history encourages habits of mind that are vital for responsible public behavior, whether as a community leader, an informed voter, a petitioner, or a simple observer. 5. History is useful in the world of work. History helps create good business people, professionals and political leaders. Knowledge in history is unquestionably an asset for a variety of work and professional situations. By studying different phases of the past and different societies in the past, it gives jobseekers the range and flexibility required in many work situations. Migrant workers, for instance, are oriented about the country where they will work prior to their departure. Political leaders likewise need to understand the past of their constituents and the milieu where they plan to govern. Theories on the peopling of the Philippines In conducting any historical research, different sources of information are required to gain extensive knowledge on a particular topic. Some researchers rely on written sources while others choose oral sources. No matter what source is being utilized, it is important to know which among the gathered sources can provide accurate details and information about the historical event or subject being researched on. Primary sources are considered as contemporary accounts of an event, personally written or narrated by an individual who directly experienced or participated in the said event. Aside from eyewitness testimonies, primary sources also include materials that capture the event, such as photographs, voice and video recordings, and the like. These materials are considered original sources that directly narrate the details of the event. These sources can be in the form of diaries and journal entries, letters, memoirs, journals, speeches, interviews, official records, such as government publications, minutes reports, artworks, and artifacts. On the other hand, secondary sources serve as interpretations or readings of primary sources. Usually, the author of a piece incorporates his or her personal insights and interpretations, thus detaching the original value of the component of the subject being discussed. These sources usually contain analyses of primary sources by experts, academicians, and professionals. These are usually in the form of published works, such as journals, articles, reviews, books, conference papers, and documentaries. They can also be based on interpretations of other secondary sources or a combination of primary and secondary sources. Many historical researchers also bank on secondary sources to get different perspectives on a particular topic. Robert B. Fox. The Tabon Caves: Archaeological Explorations and Excavations on Palawan Island, Philippines (Manila, 1970), p. 40 Tabon Man - During the initial excavations of the Tabon cave, June and July 1962, the scattered fossil bones of at least three individuals were excavated, including a large fragment of a frontal bone with the brows and portions of the nasal bones. These fossil bones were recovered towards the rear of the cave along the left wall. Unfortunately, the area in which the fossil human bones were recovered had been disturbed by Megapode birds. It was not possible in 1962 to establish the association of these bones with a specific flake assemblage. Although they were provisionally related to either Flake Assemblage II or III. Subsequent excavations in the same area now strongly suggest that the fossil human bones were associated with Flake Assemblage III for only the flakes of this assemblage have been found to date in this area of the cave. The available date would suggest that Tabon Man may be dated from 22,000 to 24,000 years. Ago. But, only further excavations in the cave and chemical because this wished me to do so. The analysis of human and animal bones from disturbed and undisturbed levels in the cave will define the exact age of the human fossils.The fossil bones are those of Homo sapiens. These will form a separate study by a specialist which will be included in the final site report for Tabon Cave. It is important, however, because of a recent publication (Scott, 1969), that a preliminary study of the fossil bones of Tabon Man shows that it is above average in skull dimensions when compared to the modern Filipino. There is no evidence that Tabon Man was “...a less brainy individual...” [Scott (1969) 36]. Moreover, Scott’s study includes many misstatements about the Tabon Caves, always the problem when writers work from “conversations.” Beyer’s Wave of Migration The first and most widely known theory of the prehistoric peopling of the Philippines is that of H. Otley Beyer, founder of the Anthropology Department of the University of the Philippines. According to Dr. Beyer, the ancestors of the Filipinos came to the islands first via land bridges which would occur during times when the sea level was low, and then later in seagoing vessels such as the balangay. Thus he differentiated these ancestors as arriving in different "waves of migration", as follows: 1."Dawn Man", a cave-man type who was similar to Java man, Peking Man, and other Asian homo sapiens of 250,000 years ago. 2.The aboriginal pygmy group, the Negritos, who arrived between 25,000 and 30,000 years ago. 3.The sea-faring tool-using Indonesian group who arrived about 5,000 to 6,000 years ago and were the first immigrants to reach the Philippines by sea. 4.The seafaring, more civilized Malays who brought the Iron Age culture and were the real colonizers and dominant cultural group in the pre-Hispanic Philippines. Beyer's theory, while still popular among lay Filipinos, has generally been disputed by anthropologists and historians. Reasons for doubting it are founded on Beyer's use of 19th century scientific methods of progressive evolution and migratory diffusion as the basis for his hypothesis. These methods have since been proven to be too simple and unreliable to explain the prehistoric peopling of the Philippines. Bellwood's Austronesian Diffusion Theory The popular contemporary alternative to Beyer's model is Peter Bellwood's Out-of-Taiwan (OOT) hypothesis, which is based largely on linguistics, hewing very close to Robert Blust's model of the history of the Austronesian language family, and supplementing it with archeological data. This model suggests that between 4500 BC and 4000 BC, developments in agricultural technology in the Yunnan Plateau in China create pressures which drive certain peoples to migrate to Taiwan. These people either already have or newly developed a unique language of their own, now referred to as Proto-Austronesian. By around 3000 BC, these groups have started differentiating into three or four distinct subcultures, and by 2500 to 1500 BC, one of these groups starts migrating southwards towards the Philippines and Indonesia, reaching as far as Borneo and the Mulluccas by 1500 BC, forming new cultural groupings and developing unique languages as they go. By 1500 BC, some of these groups started migrating east, reaching as far as Madagascar around the first millennium AD. Others migrate west, settling as far as Easter Island by the mid-thirteenth century AD, giving the Austronesian language group the distinction of being one of the widest distributed language groups in the world, in terms of the geographical span of the homelands of its languages. According to this theory, the peoples of the Philippines are the descendants of those cultures who remained on the Philippine islands when others moved first southwards, then eastward and westward. Solheim's Island Origin Theory Bellwood based his analysis primarily on linguistic analysis, Solheim's approach was based on artifact findings. On the basis of a careful analysis of artifacts, he suggests the existence of a trade and communication network that first spread in the Asia-Pacific region during its Neolithic age (c.8,000 to 500 BC). According to Solheim's NMTCN theory, this trade network, consisting of both Austronesian and non- Austronesian seafaring peoples, was responsible for the spread of cultural patterns throughout the Asia-Pacific region, not the simple migration proposed by the Out-of- Taiwan hypothesis. Solheim 2006 Solheim came up with four geographical divisions delineating the spread of the NMTCN over time, calling these geographical divisions "lobes." Specifically, these were the central, northern, eastern and western lobes. The central lobe was further divided into two smaller lobes reflecting phases of cultural spread: the Early Central Lobe and the Late Central Lobe. Instead of Austronesian peoples originating from Taiwan, Solheim placed the origins of the early NMTCN peoples in the "Early Central Lobe," which was in eastern coastal Vietnam, at around 9,000 BC. He then suggests the spread of peoples around 5,000 BC towards the "Late central lobe", including the Philippines,via island Southeast Asia, rather than from the north as the Taiwan theory suggests. Thus, from the Point of view of the Philippine peoples, the NMTCN is also referred to as the Island Origin Theory. This "late central lobe" included southern China and Taiwan, which became "the area where Austronesian became the original language family andMalayo-Polynesian developed." In about 4,000 to 3,000 BC, these peoples continued spreading east through Northern Luzon to Micronesia to form the Early Eastern Lobe, carrying the Malayo- Polynesian languages with them. These languages would become part of the culture spread by the NMTCN in its expansions Malaysia and western towards Malaysia before 2000 BC, continuing along coastal India and Sri Lanka up to the western coast of Africa and Madagascar; and over time, further eastward towards its easternmost borders at Easter Island. Thus, as in the case of Bellwood's theory, the Austronesian languages spread eastward and westward from the area around the Philippines. Aside from the matter of the origination of peoples, the difference between the two theories is that Bellwood's theory suggests a linear expansion, while Solheim's suggests something more akin to concentric circles, all overlapping in the geographical area of the late central lobe which includes the Philippines. Jocano's Core Population Theory This theory holds that there weren't clear discrete waves of migration. Instead it suggests early inhabitants of Southeast Asia were of the same ethnic group with similar culture, but through a gradual process over time driven by environmental factors, differentiated themselves from one another. Jocano contends that what fossil evidence of ancient men show is that they not only migrated to the Philippines, but also to New Guinea, Borneo, and Australia. He says that there is no way of determining if they were Negritos at all. However, what is sure is that there is evidence the Philippines was inhabited tens of thousands of years ago. In 1962, a skull cap and a portion of a jaw, presumed to be those of a human being, were found in a Tabon Cave In Palawan. The nearby charcoal from cooking fires have been dated to c. 22,000 years ago. While Palawan was connected directly to Sundaland during the last ice age (and separated from the rest of the Philippines by the Mindoro Strait), Callao Man's still-older remains (c. 67,000 B.P.) were discovered in northern Luzon. Some have argued that this may show settlement of the Philippines earlier than that of the Malay Peninsula. Jocano further believes that the present Filipinos are products of the long process of cultural evolution and movement of people. This not only holds true for Filipinos, but for the Indonesians and the Malays of Malaysia, as well. No group among the three is culturally or genetically dominant. Hence, Jocano says that it is not correct to attribute the Filipino culture as being Malayan in orientation. According to Jocano's findings, the people of the prehistoric islands of Southeast Asia were of the same population as the combination of human evolution that occurred in the islands of Southeast Asia about 1.9 million years ago. The claimed evidence for this is fossil material found in different parts of the region and the movements of other people from the Asian mainland during historic times. He states that these ancient men cannot be categorized under any of the historically identified ethnic groups (Malays, Indonesians, and Filipinos) of today. Other prominent anthropologists like Robert Bradford Fox, Alfredo E. Evangelista, Jesus Peralta, Zeus A. Salazar, and Ponciano L. Bennagen agreed with Jocano. However some still preferred Beyer's theory as the more acceptable model, including anthropologist E. Arsenio Manuel. Customs of the Tagalog by Juan de Placencia Juan de Plansencia A Spanish priest of the Franciscan Order, spent most of his missionary life in the Philippines, where he founded numerous towns in Luzon and wrote several religious and linguistic books. Plasencia is reported to have arrived in the Philippines in 1578 and joined forces with another missionary, Fray Diego de Oropesa. They both started preaching around Laguna de Bay and Tayabas, Quezon where he founded several towns. The following years, they also put up a large number of towns in the provinces of Bulacan, Laguna and Rizal including Caliraya, Majayjay, Nagcarlan, Lilio (Liliw), Pila, Santa Cruz, Lumban, Pangil, Siniloan, Morong. Antipolo, Taytay, and Meycauayan. He wrote a number of books intended to promote the understanding of both the Spanish language among the natives, and the local languages among the missionaries, to facilitate the task of spreading Christianity. Plasencia is believed to have authored the first book printed in the Philippines, the Doctrina Cristiana, which was not only printed in Spanish but also in Tagalog, in both Latn script, and the commonly used Baybayin script of the natives of the time, and it even had a version in Chinese. Customs of the Tagalogs In pre-colonial times, the Tagalog people were organized into small communities called barangays, each governed by a chief known as a datos. The datos held both political and military leadership, commanding respect and obedience from the people. Offenses against the datos, especially involving their family, were severely punished. Each barangay typically consisted of 30 to 100 houses. While many barangays coexisted in close proximity due to wars, they maintained independence, connected only by friendship and kinship. The lands on mountain ridges were communally owned, allowing anyone from any barangay to clear and sow land during the rice harvest, and no one can compel him to abandon it. The chiefs, in their various wars, helped one another with their respective barangays. In addition to the chiefs, there were three castes: nobles, commoners, and slaves. Nobles The nobles were the free-born whom they call maharlica. They did not pay tax or tribute to the dato, but must accompany him in war, at their own expense. They were personal followers of the datu whose role was to help him in activities that involve the welfare of the barangay. These activities included agricultural labor, building of houses, and fighting wars. Commoners The commoners are called aliping namamahay. They are married, and serve their master, whether he be a dato or not, with half of their cultivated lands, as was agreed upon in the beginning. They accompanied him whenever he went beyond the island, and rowed for him. They live in their own houses, and are lords of their property and gold. Their children inherit it, and enjoy their property and lands. The children, then, enjoy the rank of their fathers, and they cannot be made slaves (sa guiguilir) nor can either parents or children be sold. If they should fall by inheritance into the hands of a son of their master who was going to dwell in another village, they could not be taken from their own village and carried with him; but they would remain in their native village, doing service there and cultivating the sowed lands. Slaves The slaves are called aliping sa guiguilir. They serve their master in his house and on his cultivated lands, and may be sold. The master grants them, should he see fit, and provides that he has profited through their industry, a portion of their harvests, so that they may work faithfully. For these reasons, servants who are born in the house of their master are rarely, if ever, sold. That is the lot of captives in war, and of those brought up in the harvest fields. The aliping namamahay lived independently and had certain rights, while the aliping sa guiguilir were household servants with fewer rights. Misunderstandings by Spanish officials led to the wrongful treatment of aliping namamahay as aliping sa guiguilir. This resulted in the illegal seizure and use of aliping namamahay's children as household servants. When these cases were brought to court, the system failed to distinguish between the two statuses, often wrongly classifying aliping namamahay and their descendants as aliping sa guiguilir, subjecting them to servitude and even sale. Classification and inheritance rights of the pre-colonial Filipino social classes, focusing on the maharlica (nobles) and their interaction with slaves. This passage describes inheritance and social class in a society with three categories: free people (maharlicas), house slaves (namamahay), and field slaves (sa guiguilir). Pure Maharlicas: Children born to free parents remain free forever. However, marriage to a slave could change their status. Maharlicas with Slave Children: If a free person has children with a slave, those children and their mothers become free. Mixed Marriages: When a free person marries a slave, their children are divided. Odds are the firstborn is free, then alternating between free and slave based on birth order. The children inherit the parent's social class (free or slave). Single Child: If a mixed couple has only one child, it holds a half-free, half-slave status. Division Timing: The text doesn't specify the age of child division, leaving it up to the parents. Slave Types: House slaves (namamahay) and their children cannot be sold or transferred, but they can be inherited within the same village. Field slaves (sa guiguilir) can be sold. When a marriage occurred between a maharlica and a slave, whether namamahay or sa guiguilir, children were divided: those falling under the first, third, and fifth positions belonged to the father, while those in the second, fourth, and sixth belonged to the mother. If only one child existed, they were considered half-free and half-enslaved. Children who became enslaved inherited the status of servitude from their parents, either namamahay or sa guiguilir. In cases of an odd number of children, the odd one was half-free and half-enslaved. The timing of the children's division remained uncertain, as it was determined individually. Among the two types of slaves, sa guiguilir could be sold, but not namamahay and their children, although they could be inherited within the same village. After marriage, maharlicas couldn't relocate without paying a fine in gold, determined by each village, potentially leading to conflict if unpaid, and while this rule applied to both genders, if one married outside their village, their children were evenly divided between the two communities, fostering loyalty to the chief. The inheritance distribution system involved various factors including dowries, legitimacy of offspring, and the consent of all involved parties, ensuring that legitimate children received a larger share, while children born from unmarried women or slaves inherited differently or not at all depending on the circumstances. If a child was born to a married woman from an adulterous relationship, the punishment inflicted by the husband on the adulterer was considered a form of dowry, granting the child an equal share in the inheritance; however, if the adulterer went unpunished, the child was not recognized as the husband's offspring and received no inheritance, yet the punishment served by the husband legitimized the child. While adopted children inherited double the amount paid for their adoption. Dowries given by men to women's parents are enjoyed by the latter during their lifetime, and upon their death, if the dowry remains, it is divided equally among the children, unless the father chooses to give something extra to the daughter; unmarried women cannot own property, as all their earnings belong to their parents In divorce cases before the birth of children, if the wife left the husband to marry another, all her dowry and an equal amount went to the husband, but if she left without remarrying, the dowry was returned; if the husband left, he lost half the dowry, with the other half returned, and if children were involved, they inherited the entire dowry and fine, held by their grandparents or responsible relatives. In some villages, upon the death of a wife who hadn't borne children within a year, half of her dowry was returned to the husband, while in another village, upon the death of the husband, half of the dowry was returned to his relatives; however, this practice isn't universal and is carried out as an act of piety, varying among communities. Marriage dowries given by fathers to their sons, even when they are children, involve complex arrangements, including fines for violating marriage agreements, with heavier fines imposed if children refuse arranged marriages after their parents' death, where the parents pay the fine if alive, assuming they intended to separate their children. Historical Context Andres Bonifacio had long desired a codified document outlining the duties and responsibilities of every member of the Katipunan. While Bonifacio was drafting this document, Emilio Jacinto was also working on a similar task. When Bonifacio sought Jacinto's feedback on his draft, Jacinto presented his own work, the Kartilya ng Katipunan. Impressed by Jacinto's writing style, Bonifacio adopted the Kartilya as the official guidebook for the Katipunan's rules and regulations. Several factors, beyond the maltreatment experienced by Filipinos under Spanish rule, influenced the formation of the Katipunan and the creation of the Kartilya: 1. The Age of Enlightenment: This era introduced Liberalism and Classicism, later evolving into Modernism in the 20th century. Secret societies like the Freemasons emerged, and new venues for intellectual exchange, such as coffeehouses, newspapers, and literary salons, flourished. 2. The French Revolution: This period of social and political upheaval in France became the foundation for modern political ideologies, spreading radicalism, liberalism, and nationalism. These ideas significantly influenced the Ilustrados in the Philippines and Europe. 3. Masonry: Introduced to the Philippines in 1856, its true roots took hold in 1889 when Graciano Lopez-Jaena organized the Logia Revolución in Barcelona. Filipino students in Spain spread Masonic ideals, influencing figures like Marcelo H. del Pilar, Jose Alejandrino, the Luna brothers, and Jose Rizal. Masonry promoted fraternity and civic movement, impacting the Katipunan's dynamics. Spanish friars, like Jesuit Francisco Foradada, viewed Masonry as the root of subversion and the enemy of God. 4. The Propaganda Movement: Sparked by the 1872 execution of the priests Gomburza, this movement led many Filipinos, including Jose Rizal, to question Spanish authorities and demand reforms. However, the peaceful reform efforts were seen as insufficient by nationalists like Bonifacio, leading to the formation of the Katipunan and an armed rebellion against Spanish rule. 5. La Liga Filipina: Established by Jose Rizal to call for reforms through legal means, its operations were cut short by Rizal's arrest and exile. The Liga split into the radical Katipunan, led by Bonifacio, and the conservative Cuerpo de Compromisarios. Rizal's exile convinced Bonifacio of the futility of peaceful reform, prompting him to formally establish the Katipunan. Emilio Jacinto: The Brains of the Katipunan. Emilio Jacinto, hailed as the "Brains of the Katipunan," played a pivotal role in shaping the Philippine revolution against Spanish colonial rule. Historians, including Artemio Ricarte and Epifanio de los Santos, lauded him as a visionary leader whose ideas and actions left an indelible mark on Filipino history. Born in Trozo, Manila, on December 15, 1875, Jacinto's early life was marked by intellectual curiosity and a thirst for knowledge. Despite conflicting accounts of his father's occupation, Jacinto's upbringing instilled in him a deep sense of patriotism and a desire for social justice. Jacinto's journey into the revolutionary movement began when he joined the Katipunan at the tender age of 19. Despite his youth, he quickly rose through the ranks, serving as fiscal, secretary, editor, and eventually, general of the organization. His keen intellect and unwavering dedication earned him the trust and admiration of his peers, leading to his pivotal role in the Katipunan's operations. The Kartilya ng Katipunan: A Revolutionary Guide At the heart of the Katipunan's ideology lay the Kartilya ng Katipunan, a comprehensive guide penned by Jacinto himself. This seminal document combined ethical teachings with a revolutionary call to action, advocating for principles of nationalism, equality, virtue, and courage. Distributed among Katipunan members as a small pamphlet, the Kartilya served as both a moral compass and a practical guide for the revolutionaries. Key Principles of the Kartilya 1. Love of Country:The Kartilya emphasizes the importance of loving and serving the Philippines, promoting nationalism and a sense of duty towards the nation. 2. Equality and Brotherhood: It advocates for equality among all members of society, stressing that everyone, regardless of social status, deserves respect and fair treatment. 3. Virtue and Integrity: The document encourages virtues such as honesty, justice, and moral integrity. It insists that true honor and nobility come from living a virtuous life rather than from wealth or social status. 4. Respect for Others: It teaches that one should treat others as they wish to be treated, promoting mutual respect and empathy within the community. 5. Self-Improvement and Education: The Kartilya underscores the importance of self-improvement and education, urging members to strive for personal and intellectual growth. 6. Courage and Sacrifice: Members are encouraged to be brave and willing to sacrifice their lives for the freedom and welfare of the country. Importance of the Kartilya in Philippine History The Kartilya ng Katipunan by Emilio Jacinto is crucial to the grand narrative of Philippine history because it encapsulates the moral and ideological foundation of the Katipunan, the revolutionary society that fought for Philippine independence from Spanish colonial rule. Here are the key points highlighting its importance: 1. Ideological Blueprint: The Kartilya served as the guiding principles and ethical code for the members of the Katipunan, outlining the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity that underpinned the movement's goals. 2. Promotion of Nationalism: By emphasizing love for country, respect for fellow Filipinos, and the importance of education and self-improvement, the Kartilya fostered a sense of national identity and unity among Filipinos, essential for the revolutionary cause. 3. Moral Guide: The Kartilya provided moral instructions, stressing virtues such as honesty, diligence, and courage, which were vital for maintaining discipline and integrity within the revolutionary movement. 4. Social Reform: Jacinto's teachings in the Kartilya addressed social justice, advocating for the rights of the poor and oppressed, thereby aligning the revolution with broader social reforms beyond mere political independence. 5. Influence on Future Movements: The principles enshrined in the Kartilya continued to inspire subsequent generations of Filipino nationalists and reformists, playing a lasting role in shaping the country's ongoing struggle for justice and equity. Kartilya ng Katipunan by Emilio Jacinto Rules: 1. Ang kabuhayang hindi ginugugol sa isang malaki at banal na kadahilanan ay kahoy na walang lilim, kundi damong makamandag. 2. Ang gawang magaling na nagbubuhat sa pagpipita sa sarili, at hindi sa talagang nasang gumawa ng kagalingan, ay di kabaitan. 3. Ang tunay na kabanalan ay ang pagkakawang gawa, ang pagibig sa kapua at ang isukat ang bawat kilos, gawa’t pangungusap sa talagang Katuiran. 4. Maitim man at maputi ang kulay ng balat, lahat ng tao’y magkakapantay: mangyayaring ang isa’y higtan sa dunong, sa yaman, sa ganda, ngunit di mahihigtan sa pagkatao. 5. Ang may mataas na kalooban inuuna ang puri sa pagpipita sa sarili; ang may hamak na kalooban inuuna ang pagpipita sa sarili sa puri. 6. Sa taong may hiya, salita’y panunumpa. 7. Huwag mong sayangin ang panahun: ang yamang nawala’y mangyayaring magbalik; ngunit panahung nagdaan na’y di na muli pang magdadaan. 8. Ipagtanggol mo ang inaapi; kabakahin ang umaapi. 9. Ang taong matalino’y ang may pagiingat sa bawat sasabihin, at matutong ipaglihim ang dapat ipaglihim. 10. Sa daang matinik ng kabuhayan, lalaki ay siyang patugot ng asawa’t mga anak: kung ang umaakay ay tungo sa sama, ang pagtutunguhan ng inaakay ay kasamaan din. 11. Ang babai ay huwag mong tignang isang bagay na libangan lamang, kun di isang katuang at karamay sa mga kahirapan nitong kabuhayan; gamitan mo nag boong pagpipitagan ang kaniyang kahinaan, at alalahanin ang inang pinagbuhatan at nagiwi sa iyong kasanggulan. 12. Ang di mo ibig na gawin sa asawa mo, anak at kapatid, ay huag mong gagawin sa asawa, anak at kapatid ng iba. 13. Ang kamahalan ng tao’y wala sa pagkahari, wala sa tangus ng ilong at puti ng mukha, wala sa pagkaparing kahalili ng Dios wala sa mataas na kalagayan sa balat ng lupa; wagas at tunay na mahal na tao, kahit laking gubat at walang nababatid kundi ang sariling wika, yaong may magandang asal, may isang pangungusap, may dangal at puri; yaong di napaaapi’t di nakikiapi; yaong marunong magdamdam at marunong lumingap sa bayang tinubuan. 14. Paglagalap ng mga aral na ito at maningning na sumikat ang araw ng mahal na Kalayaan dito sa kaabaabang Sangkapuluan, at sabugan ng matamis niyang liwanag ang nangagkaisang magkakalahi’t magkakapatid na ligayang walang katapusan, ang mga ginugol na buhay, pagud, at mga tiniis na kahirapa’y labis nang natumbasan.